I'm voting for Nancy if Kissell doesn't support Health Care Reform

I am calling Congressman Kissell's office tomorrow and telling him that if he does not vote to support Health Care reform, my vote in the Primary is going to his opponent Nancy Shakir. These are my reasons why. First if health care reform fails, the Republicans will take over both the House and Senate after this year's election because the Democratic base will be thoroughly demoralized and will not turn-out. Kissell will be a second term back-bencher with no influence if he wins and if the Republican candidate wins he will just be another rabid radical conservative among many. If the Democrats hold the house and Kissell wins great. Iff he does not, well the Republican winner will be a first term Congressman from the minority party, capable of embarrassing us, but not much else.

The bottom line is, the only chance we have of holding onto the House is to pass health care reform. Call your Democratic Congressman and tell them to vote for the Senate bill


Good luck on getting an answer.

Kissell seemingly has developed a long index finger which is always aloft to indicate which way the wind is blowing. Depending on the breeze the day of the vote...well, that's what you'll get.

Stan Bozarth

Call, Call, Call!

Just got off the phone with Congressman Kissell's Washington office. According to the young lady who answered the phone, Kissell is waiting to see what is in the final bill before deciding on how he is going to vote. Quite a change from the "I will not cut Medicare" spiel I have been hearing. We are inches from getting the greatest expansion of health care since Medicare was enacted. Call your Democratic Congressman and tell them to vote yes!

That is encouraging.

Perhaps the absence of a credible opponent in the Republican primary has emboldened him reconsider his backward stand on health care reform.

Perhaps he will think in the long term about building his capacity to influence his colleagues on behalf of his constituents. If so, he should not wish to find himself stuck on the wrong side of a historic achievement like health care reform. His fellow Democrats will remember--for a long, long time--who fought alongside them in the face of political risk, and who ran for the hills.

Dan Besse


"if health care reform fails, the Republicans will take over both the House and Senate after this year's election because the Democratic base will be thoroughly demoralized and will not turn-out."

That's hilarious! Did you notice what happened in Massachusetts?

A seat that normally goes 2/3 Democrat went Republican by a comfortable margin, mainly because Sen. Brown promised to oppose the Democrats' health care proposals. Close to 30% of the voters who normally vote Democratic voted Republican this time.

There are 10 Congressional districts in Massachusetts. All ten are held by progressive Democrats. In 2008 the closest race was Barney Frank, and he got 70% of the votes.

Yet Scott Brown won in Massachusetts!

How many Democrats down here do you think can win if they lose 30% of their usual voters?? Even specially-designed-super-safe-seat holder David Price is in danger of losing if that happens here. NC could end up with a 9R/4D Congressional delegation.

That's because most of the American people don't want the federal government telling their doctors what to do, and what not to do. If the Democrats ram this through anyhow, they'll lose control of the House, and they'll lose most of the seats that are up this year in the Senate, too.

The coattails could well turn over the NCGA to the Republicans, too, for the first time since Reconstruction, because most North Carolina Democrats were educated in the public schools and don't know the difference between a U.S. Senator and a N.C. Senator. (If you don't believe me, ask a few random pedestrians who their NC Senator is, and see how many say "Kay Hagan" or "Richard Burr" or "I don't know" or "Don't I have two of them?")

The only hope the Democrats have to hang onto monopoly control of government in November is for this issue to go away fast, so that the voters have time to forget about it. But there are only eight months left, and Obama seems determined to keep pushing.

It is suicidal behavior for the Democratic Party. I hope he keeps it up!

Have you been following HCR lately?

Dave, things are changing almost daily with regard to this debate on Health Care Reform. The HCR bill is now including a number of the reforms the republican leadership has said they want to see in it including the two "bone-of-contention" issues of TORT reform and allowing interstate competition for insurance companies, both of which the republicans see as important because they believe these can help bring down costs. There are others as well that are being look at ALL in the spirit of bi-partisanship on the part of the democrats.

Your belief that the voters will turn on democratic candidates if the bill is implemented using simple-majority needs a re-look, my friend. If, after including many of the provisions republicans see as important and making sure other provisions they see inappropriate are kept out of the bill the republicans still waiver, it will be THEM that will suffer at the polls. I am no political strategist, but even I could put together a damn good set of campaign ads showing how the democrats did listen to both the voters AND the republicans and have crafted a bill that became law despite partisanship.

Do not get too hopey-hopey just yet, Dave. The electorate is not as ignorant as you make them out to be.

we'll see

Until this week, the Democrats seemed determined to ram this thing through without any Republican input at all. (Obama's promised new bipartisanship, televised committee hearings, etc., were just campaign lies.) The only reason they are even talking to Republicans now is that Scott Brown won.

I seriously doubt that they will really reform the "reform" bill, to do away with the Democrats' main purpose, which is federal control of health care.

H.R. 3590, as passed by the Senate, says, “Beginning on January 1, 2015, a qualified health plan may contract with... (B) a health care provider only if such provider implements such mechanisms to improve health care quality as the Secretary [of HHS] may by regulation require.”

If that becomes law, then one person, appointed by the President, will have complete control over American medicine. We shouldn't call her Sec. of HHS anymore, we should call her King of HHS!

According to that provision, doctors must comply with whatever the King of Health and Human Services decrees - cost controls, treatment standards, testing limits, and anything else imaginable - or they won't get paid.

Note that this control will extend even to cash purchases of medical services. If docs and labs and clinic wants to be paid for anything by insurance, they must comply with all regulations issued by the King of HHS covering any aspect of their businesses, including cash transactions.

What's more, the bills all mandate first-dollar coverage of routine "preventive" care, such as checkups, which means no more cutting out the insurance middleman, no more $50 checkups, etc. -- no more bread & butter for low-cost, cash-only medical practices. That provision will significantly increase costs, and it will cut the heart out of the most effective cost containment reform we have seen thus far, which is HSAs+HDHPs.

Yet one of the top stated purposes of the Democrats "reform" bill is cost control. (That's right in the long title of the original House-passed bill.) So how are they going to cut costs, when they mandate things which increase costs?

The answer is that under these schemes the feds must have the authority to say "no" to some health care expenditures. They can't control costs, otherwise. That's why the bills must give the federal government such sweeping authority over medical providers.

They won't call it "rationing," of course. They'll call it "treatment standards" or other innocuous-sounding euphemisms. But the purpose will be to prevent medical expenditures which are deemed to not be cost-effective.

That's the heart of the Democrats' view of what heath care reform means. I really don't expect them pass a heath care reform bill that lacks it. Do you?

Perhaps this is a fundamental difference between

you and me. I will advocate for the right thing, even if it penalizes my party at the ballot box.

Can you understand how ridiculous it would be for any progressive to take your advice seriously about anything?

Of course.


Hey Dave

What James said.


well, if you or someone you love you might ever get old and need truly excellent medical care, you should not support the Democrats' approach to heath care reform, regardless of your political views

Goodness Gracious !!

What flavor was that kool-aid ?

Congress should not be a self licking ice cream cone

I vote to elect people to enact legislation I believe in, not to get themselves re-elected.

Several points. The first is that I don't agree that the Massachusetts Special election outcome was predominantly on health care reform and if so so what, why should the small number of Mass voters, who already get universal health care decide for the rest of the nation? We had a national election in 2008 where health care was vigorously debated and the Democrats won by a comfortable margin. Elections have consequences.

The next point is the Democrats are going to loose the Senate and loose seat in the House regardless of what was done with health care. Since the Civil War there has been only two mid-terms where the President's party held or gained seats.

Also the "damage" of pushing health care has already been done. The Democrats might as well deliver on one of their core issues instead of being seen as a party of losers. The reason that the Republicans are fighting this tooth and nail is that they know that if it passes and the American people find out that the sky didn't fall and they what a good thing they got, the Democratic Party will reap the well deserved rewards.

The last point is that the Democrats are going to loose seats regardless, but in my opinion they will loose more seats if the Democratic base sees that they can't deliver on a signature issue.

BTW, you don't think that private insurance companies are telling your doctors what to do now? At lease if it is the government doing it you can petition the government or vote the bums out. Try that with BCBS or Aetna.

I know

I know that private insurance companies aren't telling my doctor what to do.

What's more, if I don't like how BCBSNC is behaving, it is easy to "throw the bums out." In fact, I did exactly that - switched to an HSA+HDHP from Celtic.

As for petitioning the federal government, what planet are you from?? I've been trying to get 5 or 10 minutes to talk with Rep. David Price for almost a year, and he absolutely, positively will not talk with me, at all. I'll do my best to "throw the bum out," but with his gerrymandered district he obviously isn't worried.

(If you want gov't to actually care what you think, they've got to care how you vote, and that means voters should pick their representatives instead of representatives picking their voters. Some of the Republicans have been trying to make this happen in the NCGA, but the Democratic leadership won't even allow a committee hearing.)

Kissell faces pressure on health care- front page Char Observer

Jim Morrill's has a front page article on this today:

Kissell faces pressure on health care


As President Obama and Congressional Democrats prepare their final push on health care overhaul, House leaders scrambling for votes are expected to turn up the pressure on members like Larry Kissell.

But the Montgomery County Democrat, who bucked his leadership in November, is poised to do it again.

"I continue to believe health care reform is necessary," he said in a statement. "However, my position has not changed on the health care reform proposal currently before Congress."

Nancy supports the health care reform bill and reconciliation to get it passed:

Kissell's Democratic primary opponent, retired educator Nancy Shakir, backs the House reform bill. After Kissell voted against it, she led a protest outside his Fayetteville office. She called it "Blow the Whistle on Kissell."

It's Kissell and 6 Republicans against health care reform vs Nancy Shakir who stands alone in this race in support of health care reform. Choice seems clear to me!


I will be supporting Ms. Shakir no matter how the congressman votes on the final bill. The ease with which he adopts Republican talking points to shore up his positions is unsettling. He has proven himself unworthy of my trust in the position he holds.


If I could have convinced more slaves that they were slaves, I could have freed thousands more.

Harriet Tubman (1822 – 1913)