IWV discusses Health Care Poll on Fox News

March 17, 2010

IWV President and CEO Heather Higgins on Fox News and Friends to discuss the latest Health Care poll commissioned by IWV

Heather Higgins on FOX News discussing FOAAs

March 17, 2010

IWV President and CEO, Heather Higgins discusses Tranparency and FOAAs on FOX News

An Open Letter to the United States House of Representatives: Support the Health Care Transparency Resolution!

January 20, 2010 

An Open Letter to the United States House of Representatives: Support the Health Care Transparency Resolution!

Dear Representative:

On behalf of an ideologically diverse coalition of millions of Americans, we write to strongly urge that you sign the discharge petition for H. Res. 847. Introduced by Representative Vern Buchanan (R-FL), this petition would force a vote on a bipartisan “Sunshine Resolution” to call on Congress and the Obama Administration to conduct all negotiations surrounding landmark health care reform legislation “in full public view and not behind closed doors.”

The last few months of deliberation on health care have exposed myriad issues on which the left and right sides of our political spectrum are deeply divided. However, robust transparency in the drafting of legislation is one of the few matters that bind all of the signatories together. Simply stated, Americans of all political stripes are united in their demand for an end to the cloistered discussions that mar our legislative process.

Our health care system affects too many lives and too many dollars to allow legislation reforming it to be designed in secret. Should such a bill become law, it would alter the circumstances of tens of millions of families and businesses. Those Americans need full access to any meetings in which decisions will be made regarding final language and details about how each chamber will proceed to the legislation, whether between Members, their legislative staff, or outside interests.

Signing this discharge petition will not be an act of politics, but one of principle. It will demonstrate your belief in the values of transparency and openness in government that enjoy overwhelming support by the American people and have been touted by President Obama and Congressional leaders. Please sign the discharge petition for H. Res. 847 in order to provide the transparency that your constituents want and deserve.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

Duane Parde
President
National Taxpayers Union

Jim Martin
Chairman
60 Plus Association

Laurence Socci
Americans for Conservative Values

 Bill Wilson
President
Americans for Limited Government

Tim Phillips
President
Americans for Prosperity

 Tom Jenney
Arizona Director
Americans for Prosperity

Grover Norquist
President
Americans for Tax Reform

William Haygood Shaker
Volunteer President
American Council for Health Care Reform

Dick Patten
President
American Family Business Institute

Terry Francke
General Counsel
Californians Aware 

John Tate
President
Campaign for Liberty 

Sandra Fabry
Executive Director
Center for Fiscal Accountability 

Jeffrey Mazzella
President
Center for Individual Freedom

Barbara Anderson
Executive Director
Citizens for Limited Taxation 

Wendy Wright
President
Concerned Women for America

Rick Scott
Conservatives for Patients Rights 

Brian McManus
Director of Federal Affairs
Council for Affordable Health Insurance 

Thomas A. Schatz
President
Council for Citizens Against Government Waste 

Jim Babka
President
DownsizeDC.org, Inc. 

Tom McClusky
Senior Vice President
Family Research Council Action 

Matt Kibbe
President and CEO
FreedomWorks 

John Tillman
CEO
Illinois Policy Institute 

Michelle D. Bernard
President and CEO
Independent Women’s Voice 

Donald P. Racheter, PhD
Director
Iowa Transparency Project

J.H. Snider, MBA, PhD
President
iSolon.org

Colin Hanna
President
Let Freedom Ring

Michael D. Ostrolenk
National Director
Liberty Coalition 

Lew Uhler
President
National Tax Limitation Committee

Doug Kagan
Chairman
Nebraska Taxpayers for Freedom 

Danielle Brian
Executive Director
Project On Government Oversight 

Paul Gessing
President
Rio Grande Foundation

John W. Whitehead
President
The Rutherford Institute

Robert S. Knego, MD
President
Sarasota County Medical Society 

Ellen S. Miller
Executive Director
Sunlight Foundation

Dane von Breichenruchardt
President
U.S. Bill of Rights Foundation 

Michael D. Ostrolenk
National Director
Liberty Coalition

Lew Uhler
President
National Tax Limitation Committee

Doug Kagan
Chairman
Nebraska Taxpayers for Freedom

Danielle Brian
Executive Director
Project On Government Oversight

Paul Gessing
President
Rio Grande Foundation

John W. Whitehead
President
The Rutherford Institute

 Robert S. Knego, MD
President
Sarasota County Medical Society

Ellen S. Miller
Executive Director
Sunlight Foundation

Dane von Breichenruchardt
President
U.S. Bill of Rights Foundation

Two factors will decide Massachusetts Senate race

Two factors will decide Massachusetts Senate race
By: Byron York
Chief Political Correspondent
January 18, 2010

Massachusetts State Senator Scott Brown, R-Wrentham, speaks at a rally in Worcester, Mass., Sunday, Jan. 17, 2010. Former Boston Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling applauds at left. Brown is running against Democrat Martha Coakley and Joseph Kennedy, a Libertarian who is running as an independent, in a special election to fill the U.S. Senate seat left empty by the death of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass.

After all the speeches, politicking, and attack ads, there are just two issues that will determine the winner of the Massachusetts Senate seat in Tuesday’s special election. The first is health care and the second is one-party government.  And in Massachusetts, neither issue works exactly as outsiders might think — and right now both are working in favor of Republican Scott Brown.

On health care, Massachusetts is in a unique position.  It already has near-universal coverage, enacted in 2006 by Republican governor Mitt Romney and the Democratic legislature, so a national measure designed to extend coverage to millions of currently-uncovered Americans means little to Bay State residents.  But the Democrats’ national health care plan would force Massachusetts residents to pay higher taxes to expand coverage elsewhere in the country — with relatively little new benefits at home.

“In this state, we basically have universal health care,” says Joey Buceta, a Boston independent who attended a Scott Brown rally in the North End Friday.  “Why should we pay more money for it?  We already have it.”

It’s an opinion heard often in this race, and it unites conservative voters who don’t like the Democratic national health care plan because it is too intrusive, expensive and coercive with independent voters who don’t like the plan because it seems redundant for Massachusetts.

Scott Brown, the surging Republican candidate, has been hitting the issue hard in his campaign appearances.  “We already have 98 percent of our people insured here in Massachusetts, so you have to be a little bit parochial here,” Brown said last week during a visit to a medical devices company in Chelmsford.  “We’re going to be basically paying for our plan, and then we’re going to be subsidizing Nebraska and Louisiana&hellipboy, that’s a real bargain.”

On the second issue, one-party government, Massachusetts is also in an unusual position.  Often called the bluest of blue states, it is certainly dominated by Democrats.  But over the years Massachusetts voters have shown an inclination to elect a Republican to the occasional state office.

That balance has usually meant a GOP governor; four of the last five Massachusetts governors have been Republicans.  At the same time, the rest of the state government, as well as the state’s delegations in the House and Senate, have been dominated by Democrats.  But even with that lopsided situation, the presence of a GOP governor gave voters a certain sense of balance.

Now, even that is gone.  Not only are all other significant state offices occupied by Democrats, the governorship is in the hands of the very Democratic, very liberal, and very unpopular Deval Patrick.  There is not even a token of Republican leadership to be found.  And for the independent voters who will play a critical role in Tuesday’s election, Massachusetts’ one-party rule mirrors the one-party rule in today’s Washington, where national Democrats are deciding important issues among themselves without even the pretense of including Republicans.

Tuesday’s special election presents the first opportunity for Massachusetts voters to remedy the situation.  Massachusetts has not sent a Republican to the Senate in more than a generation, but voters might take this chance to restore some small measure of balance to a government that is perhaps too blue even for a very blue state.

“This country was built on debate,” says Diane Anderson, a Brown voter from Swampscott, Massachusetts.  “And with the Democrats having 60 senators&hellipjust for that fact alone, if for no other reason, we should continue to have debate, and Brown will bring debate, being the 41st Republican.”

It’s a theme Brown has hit over and over. “This Senate seat does not belong to no one person and no one political party,” he said at a rally in Worcester Sunday.  “It belongs to the people of Massachusetts.”

Finally, there is a growing sense that the Democratic party’s domination has led to widespread corruption.  Three — yes, three — consecutives speakers of the Massachusetts state legislature, all Democrats, have been indicted.  Other Democratic lawmakers are in trouble, as well. There has perhaps never been a better time for a Republican to argue that one-party rule has led to too much conformity and corruption.

Given the uniqueness of Massachusetts politics, voters’ feelings about the top two issues in this election — health care and one-party rule — seem unlikely to be affected much by outside appeals, whether they be from President Obama, former President Clinton, or former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani, who campaigned for Brown on Friday.  What do those outsiders have to add to the public’s understanding of how the issues play out in Massachusetts?  State voters have their own distinctive perspective, and that is what will guide their decision on Tuesday.

Dr. Schratz on your health care

January 18, 2010

Listen to Dr. Lorraine M. Schratz on the future of your health care.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Dr. Rockett on the future of your healthcare

January 18, 2010

Listen to what Dr. Rockett, a MA resident and surgeon, has to say about why this election is important to the future of your healthcare.

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Brown’s run may be model for GOP

Brown’s run may be model for GOP
Tapping discord on health bills

 By Lisa Wangsness
Globe Staff / January 15, 2010

WASHINGTON – National GOP strategists say that the unexpected tightening in the Massachusetts Senate race has demonstrated the potency of the electorate’s antipathy for the Democratic health care legislation, and that Republican Scott Brown’s campaign could become a template for Republican challengers across the country in this year’s midterm elections.

“He’s making health care a front-and-center issue in the most liberal state in the country, and it’s working for him,’’ said Whit Ayres, who cofounded Resurgent Republic, a group of conservative pollsters and strategists formed to shape the national debate. “That’s the major message – that this bill is an albatross around the necks of the Democrats, and if it works this well in Massachusetts, just imagine how well it will work in less liberal states.’’

Brown has portrayed the Democratic health care bills as bloated, tax-stuffed mistakes that would do little to solve Massachusetts’ biggest health care challenge – controlling costs – while forcing its residents to sub sidize insurance for people in other states. He has called for Congress to “go back to the drawing board’’ and come up with a new plan. And he has capitalized on speculation about whether Democrats might try to delay his confirmation if he wins in order to ram the health bill through, stoking concerns about transparency and fairness raised by special deals Democratic leaders made last year to entice fence-sitters to vote for the bill.

“Threatening to ignore the results of a free election and steal this Senate vote from the people of Massachusetts takes their schemes to a whole new level,’’ the Brown campaign said in a recent statement, in a burst of rhetoric that has been typical of his camp. A spokesman for Brown declined to comment for this story.

Secretary of State William F. Galvin has said he will follow the law, which requires him to wait 10 days to certify the election to ensure the counting of absentee military ballots from military personnel stationed overseas.
GOP strategist Ed Rollins said that if Brown even comes close to defeating Democrat Martha Coakley, who just weeks ago was seen as a shoo-in, Brown’s campaign “could be viewed as a model’’ for GOP contenders nationwide, and strategists would scrutinize “what did he say, and how was he saying it.’’

Even some Republicans who had been predicting big gains in the 2010 elections can scarcely believe the seat that was once occupied by US Senator Edward M. Kennedy, a revered liberal who held it for 47 years and called universal health insurance “the cause of my life,’’ is suddenly vulnerable. This in a state whose landmark 2006 health care law became a model for the federal legislation under discussion, a law that remains popular today.

“I think Republican strategists are certainly taking note of that and saying, ‘We thought it would work in a lot of the country, but the fact it’s working in Massachusetts tells us that it will really work,’ ’’ said Rob Gray, a GOP strategist based in Boston. “The big thing is that the health care bill is a big empty vessel into which people can assign their pet peeves or anger . . . [about] how the federal government is being run and the state of the economy.’’

National polls have shown dismal support for the House and Senate health care bills, which Democratic leaders are racing to merge in talks this week. A CNN poll conducted Jan. 8-10 found 57 percent of respondents opposed to the proposals and 40 percent in favor.

Coakley has thrown her support behind the Democratic effort, arguing it would cover more than 30 million uninsured Americans, reduce the health costs burdening Massachusetts families and businesses, and absorb some of the costs of Massachusetts’ health care law that state taxpayers are currently covering.

Brown is tapping into a general dissatisfaction about the state of the country and what many view as the Democrats’ misplaced response to its problems, said Stuart Rothenberg, editor and publisher of the Rothenberg Political Report, a nonpartisan newsletter covering national politics and campaigns.

“I think the focus on health care has been so heavy for so long, and the public looks around at all these other problems and says, ‘Why the heck don’t you do something about jobs?’ ’’ he said. “It may not be Obama’s fault that the economy hasn’t rebounded, but politicians are held responsible for how people feel. I think you’ll see Republican candidates around the country just taking advantage of all this.’’

One lesson GOP challengers nationwide might take from the Brown campaign, analysts say, is to frame their complaints about the health care legislation in economic terms, rather than on health policy or ideological grounds. Brown has avoided the battle cries of last summer’s Tea Parties about a Canadian-style government takeover of health care or so-called death panels, which would probably not resonate as well in a traditionally liberal state like Massachusetts.

Instead, Brown has lumped the proposed tax increases in the health care bill together with Coakley’s support for other Democratic initiatives, such as allowing the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts to expire and the cap and trade bill, to assert Coakley supports $2 trillion in tax increases.

“The theme of taxes hurting middle-income people and the economic recovery is the big take,’’ said Robert Blendon, a professor of health policy and political analysis at Harvard University. He added that Brown has the benefit of running just as Democratic leaders in Washington are hotly debating how to raise the money to pay for the health care bill. “He’s arguing that in this economic climate, you just can’t do that.’’

Brown has also localized the health care issue, arguing it will effectively force Massachusetts taxpayers to subsidize health care in other states. Brown has a unique advantage in that Massachusetts already has near-universal health insurance, so Coakley has little opportunity to base her appeals for the bill on helping the uninsured in her home state.
At the same time, Brown has played up the “special deals’’ that Senate leaders doled out to win votes, such as guaranteeing additional Medicaid money for the home states of Senator Ben Nelson, Democrat of Nebraska, and Senator Mary Landrieu, Democrat of Louisiana. “It is broken,’’ Brown said in his final debate with Coakley. “The backroom deals in Nebraska and Louisiana we know all about.’’

David Winston, a veteran national GOP consultant, noted that Brown has not campaigned against health reform per se – Brown says he supports making changes – but he would go about it differently. That’s smart, Winston said, because the public does believe the health care system needs to be changed.

It is also an argument that has been used before. In 1994, the insurance industry’s “Harry and Louise’’ ads that helped kill the Clinton health care bill ended with the couple lamenting, “There’s got to be a better way.’’

The Andy Caldwell Show: Harry Reid’s Remarks

December 14, 2009

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

IWF President and CEO Michelle D. Bernard joined The Andy Caldwell Show to discuss IWF op-ed on Harry Reid.

The Eddie Burke Show: Harry Reid is Wrong on History and Wrong on Health Reform

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Nicole Kurokawa joined The Eddie Burke Show to discuss Harry Reid on Health Reform.

Health Care Overhaul

FOX News
September 11, 2009