Dear Rep. Miller,
Why did you vote NO on the Kucinich amendment to the Health Care Reform bill, an amendment that would allow the states to enact single-payer health care systems? (Thank goodness it passed the Ed & Labor Committee vote, in spite of your opposition.)
You claim that you fully support a "public option". Isn't single-payer a public option? Single-payer would eliminate the insurance company middle man, control costs, and ensure universal coverage. The so-called public option in the current version of the bill would not be nearly as effective as a single-payer system.
If you support the concept of universal affordable public health care, but can't get enough votes in the House to pass a single-payer system, why in the world would you block the States from enacting it?!
As this bill works its way through congress, there will be many working behind the scenes trying to strip this amendment out of the final bill. Please don't be one of them!
____________________________________________
House Lets States do Single-Payer
by David Swanson , July 17, 2009
http://www.opednews.com/
On Friday morning at 9:45 a.m. ET in the House Committee on Education and Labor, the committee members voted 25 to 19 to pass Congressman Dennis Kucinich's amendment to the healthcare reform bill. This amendment, if it survives the full House, the Senate, the conference, and the President, will not alter the federal legislation except to allow states to create single-payer healthcare systems if they choose to. ....
READ Full Article and see ROLL CALL VOTE
_________________________________________
A Real Win for Single-Payer Advocates
by John Nichols, July 17, 2009
http://www.thenation.com/
Canada did not establish its national health care program with a bold, immediate political move by the federal government.
The initial progress came at the provincial level, led by the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation's Tommy Douglas when he served from 1941 to 1960 premier of Saskatchewan. The universal, publicly-funded "single-payer" health care system that Douglas and his socialist allies developed in Saskatchewan proved to be so successful and so popular that it was eventually adopted by other provinces and, ultimately, by Canada's federal government.
... Votes for the amendment came from progressive Democrats who favor single-payer -- such as Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chairs Lynn Woolsey, of California, and Raul Grijalva, of Arizona -- as well as conservative Republicans who have no taste for single-payer but want states to be able to set their own agendas.
Opposition to the amendment came mainly from Democrats such as committee chair George Miller, of California, who have resisted moves to create more flexible, innovation-friendly legislation.
.... After the committee vote, Rose Ann DeMoro, the executive director of the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee, said, "This is a historic moment for patients, for American families, and for the tens of thousands of nurses and other single-payer activists from coast to coast who can now work in state capitols to pass single-payer bills, the strongest, most effective solution of all to our healthcare crisis."
READ Full Article
_________________________
For an overview of the current health care reform bill being discussed and formulated in congress, and its prospects for genuine reform, see article, "Obama's Health Plan, far from transformation".
For better understanding of single-payer system, see website of Physisians for a National Health Program http://www.pnhp.org/
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Miller flip flops on prior vote against war funding
Dear Congressman Miller,
We were so impressed with your vote in the House on May 14 to oppose the $100 billion supplemental war funding bill to continue our endless military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course you and the sixty others who voted against it knew it would easily pass anyway, but it was an important principled stand.
Since then, the Senate passed their version of the bill, tacking on an additional 100 billion in the form of a loan to the IMF (to bail out European banks!), and now the House Republicans are saying they won't vote for the revised House/Senate version of the bill! This means the bill could actually fail!! And the wars could end!!
Unless of course the "House leadership" can convince at least forty of those Democrats who voted no on the first version of the war funding bill to flip their vote and vote yes on the revised bill.
And sadly we watched as you were one of the first of those Democrats to step forward and announce to reporters that you would vote yes on the revised bill. I guess this shouldn't surprise us, since you are actually Chair of the "Congressional Democratic Policy Committee".
But this certainly makes your original vote on May 14 look like an empty gesture, a safe vote for the purpose of political posturing.
NOTE TO READERS: If you don't like American policy of endless war, and George Miller's support for it, call him and tell him!
George Miller's contact form: http://georgemiller.house.gov/contactus/
Phone: 202-225-2095
We were so impressed with your vote in the House on May 14 to oppose the $100 billion supplemental war funding bill to continue our endless military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course you and the sixty others who voted against it knew it would easily pass anyway, but it was an important principled stand.
Since then, the Senate passed their version of the bill, tacking on an additional 100 billion in the form of a loan to the IMF (to bail out European banks!), and now the House Republicans are saying they won't vote for the revised House/Senate version of the bill! This means the bill could actually fail!! And the wars could end!!
Unless of course the "House leadership" can convince at least forty of those Democrats who voted no on the first version of the war funding bill to flip their vote and vote yes on the revised bill.
And sadly we watched as you were one of the first of those Democrats to step forward and announce to reporters that you would vote yes on the revised bill. I guess this shouldn't surprise us, since you are actually Chair of the "Congressional Democratic Policy Committee".
But this certainly makes your original vote on May 14 look like an empty gesture, a safe vote for the purpose of political posturing.
NOTE TO READERS: If you don't like American policy of endless war, and George Miller's support for it, call him and tell him!
George Miller's contact form: http://georgemiller.house.gov/contactus/
Phone: 202-225-2095
Monday, December 29, 2008
No more billions without accountability and jobs
Dear Mr. Miller,
What about the next $350 Billion the Treasury is asking for to continue to fund the bailout "plan". Are you just going to hand it over, telling us again that the situation is urgent and there is no other option?
You gave the banks $350 billion. It was supposed to get them lending again, which would help companies and consumers get credit. But the credit markets are still frozen and the economy's getting worse. And the banks won't even say what they did with the money!
Now Treasury is asking Congress for the remaining $350 billion in bailout funds. No more oversight. No strings attached. Just $350 billion that could be spent on health care, or green jobs, or more teachers—going instead into the black hole that is our financial system.
Please don't give one more dime to the banks unless they can show they're using it to create jobs and stimulate the economy!
What about the next $350 Billion the Treasury is asking for to continue to fund the bailout "plan". Are you just going to hand it over, telling us again that the situation is urgent and there is no other option?
You gave the banks $350 billion. It was supposed to get them lending again, which would help companies and consumers get credit. But the credit markets are still frozen and the economy's getting worse. And the banks won't even say what they did with the money!
Now Treasury is asking Congress for the remaining $350 billion in bailout funds. No more oversight. No strings attached. Just $350 billion that could be spent on health care, or green jobs, or more teachers—going instead into the black hole that is our financial system.
Please don't give one more dime to the banks unless they can show they're using it to create jobs and stimulate the economy!
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Don't tell us bank bailout was your only option
Mr. Miller,
Why did you vote to use our taxpayer's money to bail out the banks, instead of insisting that the money should be used to help homeowners who can't pay their mortgages and and also used for job creation programs to stimulate spending? Do you think we are fooled when you tell us that because the government had to act fast, the Paulson bank bailout plan was the ONLY SOLUTION AVAILABLE? We know that there were many eminent economists proposing other solutions that would have directly benefited and protected Main Street instead of Wall Street. Why did you and the rest of the establishment Congressional leadership act as though those Main Street solutions didn't even exist? Why did you dutifully follow the dictates of Paulson, Bernanke, and their biased Wall Street economists to pass their plan for a $700 billion bailout that will only protect Wall Street banks (and their wealthy executives and investors) from the consequences of their greedy and reckless business investments at our great expense?
Congressman Miller, please watch this video clip of a speech by Congressman Brad Sherman , and answer his challenges, if you can! (The full video can be viewed at http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/441.html )
Why did you vote to use our taxpayer's money to bail out the banks, instead of insisting that the money should be used to help homeowners who can't pay their mortgages and and also used for job creation programs to stimulate spending? Do you think we are fooled when you tell us that because the government had to act fast, the Paulson bank bailout plan was the ONLY SOLUTION AVAILABLE? We know that there were many eminent economists proposing other solutions that would have directly benefited and protected Main Street instead of Wall Street. Why did you and the rest of the establishment Congressional leadership act as though those Main Street solutions didn't even exist? Why did you dutifully follow the dictates of Paulson, Bernanke, and their biased Wall Street economists to pass their plan for a $700 billion bailout that will only protect Wall Street banks (and their wealthy executives and investors) from the consequences of their greedy and reckless business investments at our great expense?
Congressman Miller, please watch this video clip of a speech by Congressman Brad Sherman , and answer his challenges, if you can! (The full video can be viewed at http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/441.html )
Friday, October 3, 2008
Questions for George Miller on the Bailout!
What can you be thinking of to dare to spend $700 billion of our taxpayer dollars without holding open hearings on the plan first?
Why haven’t you listened to the advice of independent economists, instead of just listening to the finance industry’s own insider “experts” (people whose policies and actions were complicit in causing this mess, and whose industry cronies will be the main beneficiaries from the bailout).
Why aren’t you questioning the underlying premise, the idea that this credit market crisis and its effects can only be solved by a bailout to the finance industry with tax payer’s money?
Why haven’t you considered any other alternatives?
Why aren’t you forcing the immense wealth on Wall Street to bail its own finance industry out? (Including paying for the government bailouts that have already been enacted at taxpayer’s expense.)
Why aren’t you including regulations and laws to stop the over leveraged banking processes and market speculation and deceit that triggered this?
Why aren’t you taking back the bonuses, fees, and compensations from the financiers who got rich from passing off these dishonest mortgage securities?
Why aren’t you including regulations or insurance to protect the small investors and pension funds from the effects of these dishonest financial schemes?
What controls have you put in place to insure that the government would purchase the bad debt mortgage securities from the banks at an honest price matching their current value?
Why aren’t you directly helping homeowners, providing assistance with their debt burden and helping families faced with bankruptcy (instead of helping the fat-cat banks and hoping that benefit will “trickle down” to homeowners and workers)?
Why aren’t you reducing debts from Main Street (the real economy) instead of Wall Street (the financiers that speculate on the real economy)?
Why aren’t you addressing the structural changes that need to be made in the fundamental processes of our debt-based monetary system, a system that has made it possible for the banks and the Fed to hold this blackmail gun to your heads?
An angry voter from Benicia
Why haven’t you listened to the advice of independent economists, instead of just listening to the finance industry’s own insider “experts” (people whose policies and actions were complicit in causing this mess, and whose industry cronies will be the main beneficiaries from the bailout).
Why aren’t you questioning the underlying premise, the idea that this credit market crisis and its effects can only be solved by a bailout to the finance industry with tax payer’s money?
Why haven’t you considered any other alternatives?
Why aren’t you forcing the immense wealth on Wall Street to bail its own finance industry out? (Including paying for the government bailouts that have already been enacted at taxpayer’s expense.)
Why aren’t you including regulations and laws to stop the over leveraged banking processes and market speculation and deceit that triggered this?
Why aren’t you taking back the bonuses, fees, and compensations from the financiers who got rich from passing off these dishonest mortgage securities?
Why aren’t you including regulations or insurance to protect the small investors and pension funds from the effects of these dishonest financial schemes?
What controls have you put in place to insure that the government would purchase the bad debt mortgage securities from the banks at an honest price matching their current value?
Why aren’t you directly helping homeowners, providing assistance with their debt burden and helping families faced with bankruptcy (instead of helping the fat-cat banks and hoping that benefit will “trickle down” to homeowners and workers)?
Why aren’t you reducing debts from Main Street (the real economy) instead of Wall Street (the financiers that speculate on the real economy)?
Why aren’t you addressing the structural changes that need to be made in the fundamental processes of our debt-based monetary system, a system that has made it possible for the banks and the Fed to hold this blackmail gun to your heads?
An angry voter from Benicia
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Bail Out Main Street, Not Wall Street
Congressman George Miller:
Based on your recent approval of the Wall Street Bailout Plan, it appears that you and the Democratic leadership have now completely abandoned your Democratic roots and values and gone over to the ideology of the Republicans, embracing their discredited trickle-down economic theories. The housing bubble and this credit crisis that we are now in proves that trickle-down ideology doesn’t work—it only benefits the financiers and wealthy investors and speculators. But now when that crowd and their “experts” hold a gun to your head and tell you to jump and bail them out, you jump – even though there is no reason to expect the banks will eagerly start loaning to other banks and businesses as soon as you spend $700 billion of our money to let them unload their bad debts on the government.
The only thing this plan does is trickle down their toxic mortgage securities to us, while ballooning our national debt which we and our grandchildren will have to pay back to those same banks plus interest! It will plunge America into a “disaster capitalism” scenario in which there is no money left over, after payments on our enormous national debt, to pay for infrastructure and basic government services and social safety nets. And what will it do to the value of the dollar and higher prices? This is a financial coup d’etat. Don’t do it!
Please do not vote for another Wall Street bailout plan. We are not fooled by the sugar coating of tax breaks (much of it pork), toothless oversight, and other tweaks. Not one cent of our taxpayer money should be spent assisting Wall Street. Vote only for a Main Street bailout plan. Use our tax money to directly assist homeowners and the real economy on Main Street.
Your constituents are watching. Don’t fail us again.
Sincerely,
Norma Fox, Benicia, CA
Note: If you want specific suggestions from independent economists on what an appropriate bailout plan should look like, please hold some public hearings and invite a few of the 200 economists who wrote to Congress on Sept. 24 regarding dangers in the Treasury Plan.
And for some very practical specific suggestions for a bailout that would protect and stimulate Main Street, that would mostly employ mechanisms that are already in place, and would not require taxpayers to borrow hundreds of billions, see the WashingtonPost.com op-ed by James K. Galbraith, Sept. 25, “A Bailout We Don’t Need”
Also see the key principles laid out by the Institute for Policy Studies in their Plan to Pay for the Recovery
Based on your recent approval of the Wall Street Bailout Plan, it appears that you and the Democratic leadership have now completely abandoned your Democratic roots and values and gone over to the ideology of the Republicans, embracing their discredited trickle-down economic theories. The housing bubble and this credit crisis that we are now in proves that trickle-down ideology doesn’t work—it only benefits the financiers and wealthy investors and speculators. But now when that crowd and their “experts” hold a gun to your head and tell you to jump and bail them out, you jump – even though there is no reason to expect the banks will eagerly start loaning to other banks and businesses as soon as you spend $700 billion of our money to let them unload their bad debts on the government.
The only thing this plan does is trickle down their toxic mortgage securities to us, while ballooning our national debt which we and our grandchildren will have to pay back to those same banks plus interest! It will plunge America into a “disaster capitalism” scenario in which there is no money left over, after payments on our enormous national debt, to pay for infrastructure and basic government services and social safety nets. And what will it do to the value of the dollar and higher prices? This is a financial coup d’etat. Don’t do it!
Please do not vote for another Wall Street bailout plan. We are not fooled by the sugar coating of tax breaks (much of it pork), toothless oversight, and other tweaks. Not one cent of our taxpayer money should be spent assisting Wall Street. Vote only for a Main Street bailout plan. Use our tax money to directly assist homeowners and the real economy on Main Street.
Your constituents are watching. Don’t fail us again.
Sincerely,
Norma Fox, Benicia, CA
Note: If you want specific suggestions from independent economists on what an appropriate bailout plan should look like, please hold some public hearings and invite a few of the 200 economists who wrote to Congress on Sept. 24 regarding dangers in the Treasury Plan.
And for some very practical specific suggestions for a bailout that would protect and stimulate Main Street, that would mostly employ mechanisms that are already in place, and would not require taxpayers to borrow hundreds of billions, see the WashingtonPost.com op-ed by James K. Galbraith, Sept. 25, “A Bailout We Don’t Need”
Also see the key principles laid out by the Institute for Policy Studies in their Plan to Pay for the Recovery
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Miller spins a response to our question about war funding
Congressman Miller responds to our key question about "why doesn't the Congressional Democratic leadership (Pelosi) simply cut off the purse strings by just not offering any more Supplemental Iraq funding bill at all." (Ending the war now was after all the clear mandate of the American voters when the elected a Democratic majority to Congress in 2006.) Cutting the purse stings by not offering a supplemental funding bill would end the war without the game of trying to round up Republican votes on a bill. With the clear message that there would be no supplemental funding extension, the military would have no choice but to begin an orderly withdrawal of troops, using the plentiful funding they still have in the pipeline from previous funding authorizations. Instead, the Democrats keep offering supplemental funding extensions with "strings attached," knowing full well that the strings will be stripped away in negotiations with the Republicans, or vetoed by the President.
Listen to Miller's response and see whether he actually answered our key question (about not offering a supplemental funding bill to vote on at all) or whether he evaded it (quote from Miller: "as you know, we cannot end the war without Republican votes"), while he throws in the false spectre that the decision to not offer another supplemental funding extension would leave our troops with no funding at all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4iFlmIJZNU
Listen to Miller's response and see whether he actually answered our key question (about not offering a supplemental funding bill to vote on at all) or whether he evaded it (quote from Miller: "as you know, we cannot end the war without Republican votes"), while he throws in the false spectre that the decision to not offer another supplemental funding extension would leave our troops with no funding at all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4iFlmIJZNU
Friday, July 20, 2007
Impeach to end Iraq war AND prevent IRAN WAR
Dear Representative Miller,
The danger of an expanded war into Iran is imminent. The only way to prevent it is through impeachment of Cheney and Bush. Legislative restraints won't work because they think they are above the law. And in any case, we don't have TIME for your legislative strategy to play out. They have already made all the preparations for an attack on Iran and they are looking for any excuse to launch it.
You know that both Cheney and Bush have committed many impeachable offenses with regard to the war in Iraq. Through the tool of impeachment you have the power not only to end the Iraq war but also to prevent a horrendous expansion of the war into Iran -- will you use that power? Will you cosign H.Res.333 (Articles to Impeach Cheney) and urge Speaker Pelosi to allow the impeachment process back on the table?
The American people will never forgive the Democrats if they allow Bush-Cheney to expand the war into Iran when they could have prevented it through their power (and responsibility) of impeachment. In the context of their intentions for imminent war with Iran, how can you say that impeachment would be a "distraction" from more important business?
Please read this article from Paul Craig Roberts, a former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration and former Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page. Think hard about his urgent warning about Iran. The fate of so many lives, and our democracy, rests on you decision. This is no time for safe political strategy.
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts07162007.html
"Impeach Now, Or Face the End of Constitutional Democracy"
Counter Punch, July 16, 2007
Sincerely,
A formerly loyal Democrat,
Benicia, CA
The danger of an expanded war into Iran is imminent. The only way to prevent it is through impeachment of Cheney and Bush. Legislative restraints won't work because they think they are above the law. And in any case, we don't have TIME for your legislative strategy to play out. They have already made all the preparations for an attack on Iran and they are looking for any excuse to launch it.
You know that both Cheney and Bush have committed many impeachable offenses with regard to the war in Iraq. Through the tool of impeachment you have the power not only to end the Iraq war but also to prevent a horrendous expansion of the war into Iran -- will you use that power? Will you cosign H.Res.333 (Articles to Impeach Cheney) and urge Speaker Pelosi to allow the impeachment process back on the table?
The American people will never forgive the Democrats if they allow Bush-Cheney to expand the war into Iran when they could have prevented it through their power (and responsibility) of impeachment. In the context of their intentions for imminent war with Iran, how can you say that impeachment would be a "distraction" from more important business?
Please read this article from Paul Craig Roberts, a former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration and former Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page. Think hard about his urgent warning about Iran. The fate of so many lives, and our democracy, rests on you decision. This is no time for safe political strategy.
http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts07162007.html
"Impeach Now, Or Face the End of Constitutional Democracy"
Counter Punch, July 16, 2007
Sincerely,
A formerly loyal Democrat,
Benicia, CA
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Cong. Miller: You must change your mind.
The demand for impeachment is growing , you must accede to the will of the people. It is a known fact the only
weapon the electorate has are its legislators. Your refusal to represent us in this matter is a serious detriment to
our demand. M.S. Vallejo
weapon the electorate has are its legislators. Your refusal to represent us in this matter is a serious detriment to
our demand. M.S. Vallejo
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Loyalty to character
Dear George Miller,
Through the years your commitment to follow your conscience and defend Democrat positions has always been appreciated and the fact that you have been continually re-elected is clear testimony to the faith that many of us have in your judgement. In the case of Iraq, a quagmire of Vietnam proportions, I choose to offer my support to any solutions you offer. Good luck and may the force be with you!
Cliff Nelson Sr.
113 Ardmore Way
Benicia, CA 94510
Through the years your commitment to follow your conscience and defend Democrat positions has always been appreciated and the fact that you have been continually re-elected is clear testimony to the faith that many of us have in your judgement. In the case of Iraq, a quagmire of Vietnam proportions, I choose to offer my support to any solutions you offer. Good luck and may the force be with you!
Cliff Nelson Sr.
113 Ardmore Way
Benicia, CA 94510
No Funding! Yes Impeachment!
Dear Representative Miller,
I wish the Democrats sent no military budget at all. That would have called the Administration's bluff and would have forced them to orderly withdraw the troops, since they would have had enough funds to do just that. Why can't the Democrats be more forceful? What are they afraid of? And why don't they want to impeach Bush, who lied to start this illegitimate war?
Respectfully,
Alberto Ramon
El Sobrante
I wish the Democrats sent no military budget at all. That would have called the Administration's bluff and would have forced them to orderly withdraw the troops, since they would have had enough funds to do just that. Why can't the Democrats be more forceful? What are they afraid of? And why don't they want to impeach Bush, who lied to start this illegitimate war?
Respectfully,
Alberto Ramon
El Sobrante
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)