Peter Roskam and His Party of Lies Poisoned the Wells in the Healthcare Reform Debate

On 02.16.10, In Economic Justice, Healthcare, Peter Roskam, Peter Roskam's Corporate Agenda, By RSR

Republican Representative Peter Roskam appeared on the ever “fair and balanced” Fox and Friends this past Friday morning for another of his Fox-facilitated rants on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democratic partisanship. Take a look:

Roskam’s villainization of Speaker Pelosi and the Democratic efforts to achieve universal healthcare coverage is laughable.

Back in early 2009, after President Obama was sworn in, national support for healthcare reform was high. A CNN/Opinion Research Survey conducted in February 2009 found that 72% of Americans favored an increased roll for the government in healthcare, with 60% believing that the government should provide health insurance or healthcare to all Americans. In a Kaiser Foundation poll conducted the same month, 62% of respondents felt it was more important than ever to take on healthcare reform now and 72% of respondents trusted the recommendations of President Obama on healthcare reform. Even as late as June of 2009, in a Employee Benefit Research Institute poll, 83% of respondents favored a new government healthcare plan that anyone can purchase.

So Americans wanted healthcare reform and they even liked the idea of a public plan, and that left Roskam and the Reublicans in Congress with a dilemma. For political reasons, they needed Obama and the Democrats to fail so that Republican prospects would be better in the 2010 mid-term elections and beyond. And they needed to satisfy their financial backers in the big business lobbies and the healthcare companies that were opposed to reform. Last summer, Peter Roskam’s friend in the Senate, Jim DeMint, famously announced the GOP intent to have healthcare reform become President Obama’s “Waterloo”.

But how do you kill a popular program? The GOP decided to play on its strengths: to lie and sow fear and confusion about Democratic reform plans. And so they embarked on  a campaign of misinformation.

They engaged spin doctor Frank Luntz to craft talking points designed to scare the public about healthcare reform. The organized astroturf groups to spread misinformation and to fund and fan the flames of the paranoid, racist Tea Party movement. They used Republican-controlled Fox News to blare their anti-reform message 24 hours a day. And GOP members took to the airwaves themselves spouting lies about death panels, massive cuts to Medicare, uncontrolled spending, and a government takeover of healthcare complete with rationing.

Peter Roskam has been an enthusiastic participant in all of this. He’s been on local an national media constantly promulgating these lies and even used over a million dollars of taxpayer funds to blanket homes in the district with mailers – an average of about 11 per household in the 3rd quarter – as part of this partisan campaign.

Naturally, people are now suspicious.

Now the GOP has shifted to playing the role of being helpless victims of extreme Democratic partisanship. President Obama has offered a summit on healthcare in response to their pleas to be listened to and now, laughably, they are calling it a trap:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
The Apparent Trap
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show
Full Episodes		 Political Humor Health Care Crisis

Peter Roskam and the GOP are liars. They are lying to kill healthcare reform because they want the President to fail and because their big corporate donors don’t want reform. And if their efforts to kill reform succeed, then Americans will continue to suffer and die for lack of coverage. And they are still gleeful about what they have done.

Because the GOP have demonstrated their unwillingness to be honest participants in formulating a workable reform plan, Democrats should make every effort possible to pass reform by reconciliation, ignoring the continued GOP effort to sabotage the process.

Peter Roskam’s conduct in all of this has been reprehensible – adolescent if not sociopathic. I sincerely hope that voters will see that and replace him this fall.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
 
0 Comments
Leave A Response

Peter Roskam Should Return Bank of America Campaign Contributions

On 02.04.10, In Banking Crisis, Economic Justice, Peter Roskam, Peter Roskam's Corporate Agenda, Regulatory Reform, By RSR
Photo of Bank of America ATM Machine by Brian ...
Image via Wikipedia

One of Congressman Peter Roskam’s big camapaign donors, Bank of America,  was all over the news today. They made news for three reasons:

  • It was revealed yesterday that Bank of America will be paying it’s investment banking employees bonuses totaling approximately $4.4 billion – an average of about $400,000 for each employee receiving a payment.
  • New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo filed a civil lawsuit against former Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis and former CFO Joseph Price, accusing them of lying to shareholders and extorting the federal government surrounding its acquisition of Merrill Lynch in 2008. The allegation is that in order to complete its deal, Bank of America’s management misled its shareholders by not disclosing massive losses that were mounting at Merrill Lynch so that the shareholders would vote to approve the deal. Once the deal was approved, Bank of America’s management manipulated the federal government into saving the deal with billions in taxpayer funds by falsely claiming that they intended to back out of the deal through a clause in the Merger Agreement. You may recall that just before the deal went down, Merrill Lynch paid out a staggering $3.57 billion dollars in employee performance bonuses, even though the company was failing.  You may also remember that Ken Lewis received a $64 million retirement package when he left the company for a job well done. After the deal, B of A received a $45 billion bailout arranged by the Bush administration.
  • A Senate report report released today suggested that, despite money laundering regulations, corrupt foreign officials are still able to move “dirty” money into U.S. financial institutions. Bank of America was specifically cited for not having raised questions about movements of funds by a corrupt Angolan arms dealer now imprisoned in France.

All of this really makes me really angry.

Bank of America is a publicly traded company. That means that your 401K and mine have money invested in the bank. So when the bank pays out obscene bonuses to its executives, that money comes out of funds that would otherwise enrich the shareholders, that is, you and me. When the bank performs poorly, the bankers still get bonuses, our 401K gets the hit, and we have to pay to clean up the mess. On top of that, the Bank seems to think it is above our laws regarding money-laundering. If they get into criminal trouble on that account, we’ll be paying that bill too.

Bank of America is a significant contributor to Peter Roskam’s campaign and to his leadership PAC. They don’t give him that money out of the goodness of their hearts. They want something back, and, in my estimation, they get it. Roskam is a fierce opponent of bank regulation, even after the worst financial collapse since the Great Depression. And he opposes the kind of financial tranaction tax supported by the Obama administration as well as consumer protections that protect you and me from the banks’ predatory practices.

Well, I think it is unseemly that Peter Roskam is getting money from B of A, and I think he ought to give it back. But don’t hold your breath.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • •
 
1 Comments
Leave A Response

Peter Roskam’s Big Flip Flop on Bonuses

On 01.21.10, In Economic Justice, Executive Compensation, Peter Roskam, Peter Roskam's Corporate Agenda, By RSR

I originally published this on May 29th, 2009. In April 2009, Peter Roskam had voted against legislation, H.R. 1664, that would have limited bonus payments to executives of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Today, apparently sensing political opportunity, Roskam introduced legislation to do that which he voted against:

Today, Congressman Peter Roskam (R-Ill.), Deputy Whip and member of the Ways & Means Committee, introduced The Protecting Taxpayers From Excessive Compensation Act, calling for new pay accountability rules for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Roskam’s proposed legislation would prohibit any employee of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, while the entities are under conservatorship or receivership, from being compensated more than any member of our Armed Forces.

“With historic federal spending and debt on one end, and unprecedented taxpayer exposure to Fannie and Freddie on the other, now is the time to take a step toward restoring accountability and the public trust in the use of taxpayer funds,” Roskam wrote in a letter to Financial Services Chairman Frank and Ranking Member Bachus prior to the Committee’s Employment Compensation Hearing being held this Friday. “There are few government personnel that perform a more solemn and vital duty to our country than the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. So long as Fannie and Freddie are effectively owned by the government, there is no reason any of their employees should be compensated more than the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs.”

Of course this time around, Roskam is making sure that the legislation won’t affect any of the big banks and investment houses that bankroll his campaigns and enable him to continue his project of making life better for big corporations. So sadly, this won’t help your 401K. Publicly traded companies will remain free as ever to spend your retirement money on bonuses and golden parchutes for their top executives.

Guess Peter Roskam thinks we are all pretty stupid.

******************************************************************

Peter Roskam’s been going to a lot of trouble to publicize his media appearances lately on his House website. Of course they consist mostly of clips from Fox News, Don Wade & Roma, and Big John & Cisco. Roskam doesn’t like to talk to anyone who might ask him a serious question. He just wants a friendly outlet for his talking points – designed to keep his base in a lather about the Dems so that they won’t realize that he’s screwing them in Washington. But I appreciate the time he’s taken to organize this material so its easy for me to find.

This video was interesting and Roskam seems to be pretty proud of it. Its a clip from Fox News back in March around the time the House voted on H.R. 1586, the measure that would have imposed a 90% tax on bonuses received in 2009 by high-paid employees of companies that received TARP bailout money. Roskam voted with the majority of House members (including about half of the Republicans) to approve the measure. And then he went on Fox News to play the outraged populist while smearing Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and the Obama administration for a mess they inherited from President Bush. I don’t think the measure ever went anywhere – just died in the Senate after AIG’s Chairman urged his employees receiving more than $100,000 to return at least half.

So was this a new Roskam we were seeing? Concerned all of a sudden about the outrages committed by big corporations at the expense of the little people back home in his district? Not so much. This was just Roskam the politician taking advantage of the moment.

Roskam showed his true colors on April 1st, when H.R. 1664, the Grayson-Himes Pay For Performance Act of 2009, came up for a vote. This was a more serious and comprehensive measure to address the issue of excessive compensation, not just for AIG but for other companies receiving bailout money as well:

The Pay for Performance Act of 2009 prohibits the payment of “unreasonable or excessive” compensation, including bonuses that are not based on performance, by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the federal home loans banks, and firms that have received funds under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act. The Treasury Secretary must define “unreasonable or excessive” compensation and outline what constitutes an appropriate performance-based bonus using criteria including the stability of a financial institution, ability to repay taxpayer funds, and adherence to appropriate risk management requirements. The prohibition only applies while government payments to the firms are outstanding. Firms subject to the Pay for Performance Act must report their compensation practices to the Treasury Secretary. Finally, the legislation applies bonus prohibitions included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to all employment contracts.

When Roskam figured the folks at home were no longer paying attention, he dropped his faux outrage and voted against the measure. But you won’t see him promoting that fact on his website.

This was not the first time Roskam had stood up for outrageous executive pay. One of Roskam’s few floor speeches during his first term was to fight against a measure that would have given shareholders a voice in limiting the excessive pay of corporate executives. But I bet you’ll never see that video on his website.

That he uses his office to fight for unlimited executive pay is particularly sad given that Roskam has been an opponent of any efforts to raise the minimum wage for people who actually work for a living and voted against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act earlier this term.

Interestingly, we understand that Peter’s new Press Secretary,Daniel Conston, is an A.I.G. alum. He also worked on the failed campaigns of Fred Thompson and John McCain. Let’s hope this endeavor goes better. But what happened to Matt? Did we convert him?

Tagged with: • • • • • •
 
0 Comments
Leave A Response

RSR Meets with 6th District Democratic Candidate Ben Lowe

On 12.21.09, In Ben Lowe, Congressional Elections, Healthcare, Peter Roskam, Peter Roskam's Corporate Agenda, By RSR

x2_64c197

I was pleased to have had the opportunity this past Thursday to meet face-to-face with 6th District Congressional Candidate, Democrat Ben Lowe of Wheaton. I sat down with Ben, and with consultant Kevin Spidel of Patriot Strategies, who, as you may remember, managed the 2006 primary race here in IL-06 for Christine Cegelis, another fine progressive candidate. In the picture above, Ben is signing my copy of his book, Green Revolution.

I have to say that I am very impressed with Ben. He is a warm, intelligent and articulate person with very progressive ideals coupled with a healthy dose of political realism. I think he has the potential to speak to the concerns of a wide variety of 6th district contituencies and bring them together to defeat Roskam, who caters to big corporations and offers nothing to help a district experiencing exceptionally hard times. Ben’s discussion of issues like healthcare and immigration reform and global climate change in terms like “justice” and “human rights” is music to my ears. I can’t wait to see Ben elected. (I kind of wanted to bring him home with me but Kevin intervened).

In the time before the primary, Ben says he will be heavily focused on getting out to meet folks in the district and listenening to their concerns. He is anxious to meet with groups, large and small, and encouraging anyone who is interested to host a coffee for friends and neighbors to get together with Ben.

Ben reports that he is also heavily focused at present on fundraising, a necessary evil when running against an opponent like Roskam who is well-funded by big corporations and extremist interest groups. Ben says that fund raising efforts are starting out well but he has a long way to go. Please consider making whatever donation you can afford through Ben’s website.

I am hoping that the more distinguished bloggers covering the 6th district who follow Roskam will getto know Ben and help to get the word out about his candidacy. Come on Progress Illinois, Prairie State Blue, Bridget in the Sixth, Wurfwhile, Heartland Progressive – this is a great progressive candidate. He deserves your support – or at least your consideration. Peter Roskam is the worst. Lets not allow him to coast to another re-election.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • •
 
4 Comments
Leave A Response

Sarah Palin’s “Death Panels” Named Political Lie of the Year

On 12.21.09, In Congressional Elections, Friends of Peter Roskam, George Bush, Healthcare, Middle Class, Peter Roskam, Peter Roskam's Corporate Agenda, Wingnuts, By RSR
Sarah Palin
Image via Wikipedia

The St. Petersburg Times’ Pulitzer Prize-winning website, PolitiFact, this past Friday named Sarah Palin “death panel” allegation as the “Lie of the Year“. Palin’s lie was selected by the site’s editors after a poll of 5,000 readers demonstrated overwhelming support for the choice.

PolitiFact here recounts the lie which earned the site’s coveted “Pants on Fire” designation back when it was originally promulgated:

The former governor of Alaska had been out of the headlines since she announced her resignation on July 3; the Facebook message instantly brought her back to the political stage.

“As more Americans delve into the disturbing details of the nationalized health care plan that the current administration is rushing through Congress, our collective jaw is dropping, and we’re saying not just no, but hell no!” Palin wrote.

“The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.”

The claim that House legislation contained anything resembling a “death panel” is demonstrably false. It did cause much needless anxiety, particularly among senior citizens, including my own parents, and seriously compromised the quality of the national discussion on healthcare reform.

Palin never renounced her lie. Instead she defended it, as in an interview with the National Review in November:

“To me, while reading that section of the bill, it became so evident that there would be a panel of bureaucrats who would decide on levels of health care, decide on those who are worthy or not worthy of receiving some government-controlled coverage,” she said. “Since health care would have to be rationed if it were promised to everyone, it would therefore lead to harm for many individuals not able to receive the government care. That leads, of course, to death.”

“The term I used to describe the panel making these decisions should not be taken literally,” said Palin. The phrase is “a lot like when President Reagan used to refer to the Soviet Union as the ‘evil empire.’ He got his point across. He got people thinking and researching what he was talking about. It was quite effective. Same thing with the ‘death panels.’ I would characterize them like that again, in a heartbeat.”

Whenever the ex-governor of Alaska distinguishes herself in this way, it warms our heart to step back and listen to noted Palinite and 6th District Congressman Peter Roskam’s reflection on Sarah Palin’s “centeredness”:

So much for Congressman Roskam’s judgement.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Tagged with: • • • • •
 
2 Comments
Leave A Response

Peter Roskam Votes Against Chemical and Water Security Act

On 11.11.09, In Homeland Security, Peter Roskam, Peter Roskam's Corporate Agenda, Terrorism, By RSR

More than 8 years since the 9/11 terrorist attacks,  the House on Friday, November 6th, the House passed by a vote of 230 to 193 the Chemical and Water Security Act of 2009 (H.R. 2868), a bill to to enhance security and protect against acts of terrorism against chemical facilities, to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to enhance the security of public water systems, and to amend the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to enhance the security of wastewater treatment works.  The bill, if enacted, will enhance the safety of 100 million Americans who live in proximity to high-risk chemical plants.  The legislation must now be considered in the Senate.

Despite the fact that, according to the Congressional Research Service, there are 53 such plants in Illinois that each put more than 10,000 people at risk, the 6th District’s Republican Congressman, Peter Roskam, voted against the bill.

Among the provisions of H.R. 2868 are the following:

  • Conditionally require the highest risk plants to use safer chemical processes where feasible and cost-effective and requires the remaining high risk plants to “assess” safer chemical processes;
  • Eliminate the current law’s exemption of thousands of chemical facilities, such as waste water and drinking water plants and port facilities;
  • Involve plant employees in the development of security plans and provides protections for whistleblowers and limit background check abuses;
  • Preserve state’s authority to establish stronger security standards;
  • Provide funding for conversion of plants, including drinking water facilities and wastewater facilities, and
  • Allow citizen suits to enforce government implementation of the law.

The bill was endorsed by a coalition more than 50 environmental, labor and health groups including Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, the United Auto Workers, Steelworkers, Teamsters, Fire Fighters, Sierra Club, Physicians for Social Responsibility, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, Environmental Defense Fund and Greenpeace.

That endorsement meant little to Peter Roskam, however, because the bill was opposed by his owners: the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber.

Republican opposition to this important security measure seems to have been based in its requirement that manufacturers take action rather than be allowed to proceed at their own pace. But according to Greenpeace, while more than 200 chemical facilities have converted to safer chemical processes since 9/11, eliminating poison gas risks to more than 30 million Americans. Yet 300 other chemical plants together put 110 million Americans at risk.

The Republicans are also opposed to the provision for citizen lawsuits. This is just another part of their project to end democracy in favor of corporate rule. The tort reform that Peter Roskam is always peddling and the tightening of consumer bankruptcy regulations are other key elements. That is the Republican plan in a nutshell: deregulation for big corporations and take away the rights of consumers to fight them. We’ve already seen the horrible results of deregulation in the present economic crisis. I don’t want to be around when they take away our right to redress in the courts.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • •
 
0 Comments
Leave A Response
Page 1 of 612345...Last »
Go To Top »

Meta

Installed by SimpleScripts