Rubber Stamp Roskam » President Obama

Peter Roskam Launches Campaign to Strip Constituents of New Health Benefits

RSR — Sun, 04 Apr 2010 06:32:42 +0000

Congressman Peter Roskam, the Republican representing Illinois’ 6th Congressional District in Chicago’s western suburbs, this week launched his campaign to repeal the landmark healthcare reform legislation recently signed into law by President Obama. Roskam, who campaigned vigorously against the bill and who voted against its passage, complains that the legislation raises healthcare costs and taxes on the middle class, piles on to the national debt, and interferes with the doctor-patient relationship.

Roskam’s complaints, are, of course, baseless. The health reform legislation will provide subsidies for low- and middle-class families to make health insurance more affordable, reduces the deficit by $132 billion over 10 years, and does absolutely nothing to disrupt the relationship between patients and physicians. And it will make health insurance available to millions of working Americans who do not have access to coverage today – 32 million by 2019. Roskam, however, is determined not to let that happen. He says the plan is a radical government takeover of healthcare. It isn’t. It is simply sound insurance regulation coupled with subsidies to make insurance more affordable. In fact, as the President has pointed out, the health exchanges that will be created under the new law are very similar to a plan created by the conservative Heritage Foundation.

The Kaiser Family Foundation has produced a couple of excellent resources to help you understand what is covered under the new healthcare legislation and the timeline over which changes will take place. If we had real representation in Congress, your Congressman would be helping you to understand this information. Since he will not, we will try to help to the degree that we are able.

Roskam’s opposition to the healthcare bill appears to be rooted in large part, not so much in the details of the reform plan, but rather in an overwhelming desire to see the President fail in order to advance his own party’s electoral prospects. Roskam is also a steadfast opponent of any kind of consumer-friendly industry regulation, be it in the realm of healthcare, banking, or the environment. We have all already seen the disatrous results of the Republican deregulatory ideology in creating the recent banking and credit crisis with the resultant recession. Now Roskam, if he has his way, would replace the Democratic reform legislation with a massive deregulation of the health insurance industry that will do nothing to help working people but will help line the pockets of the insurance companies that fund his campaigns.

Though his his claims about the dangers of the healthcare reform legislation are without merit, Roskam has enormous resources at his disposal. His Congressional office gives him tremendous access to corporate media eager to help him in his misinformation campaign and his Congressional budget and franking privileges allow him to produce mailers like we saw last summer designed to scared district residents about reform. We will have to be strong and fight hard to keep him from taking away our hard-won health benefits.

We encourage you to contact Peter Roskam to voice your support for healthcare reform and to ask him to cease his efforts to take away your benefits. You can reach him at (630) 893-9670 in Bloomingdale or at (202) 225-4561 in Washington.

Roskam has also taken to Twitter as part of his efforts to kill health reform. You can talk back to him directly there. He is @PeterRoskam and he is tweeting about repeal using the tag #218hcr. We are doing are best to counteract his misinformation there.

President Obama Masterfully Demolishes GOP Critics, Roskam Included

RSR — Sat, 30 Jan 2010 04:07:25 +0000

Just finished watching the video of President Obama’s Q&A session at the GOP House Issues conference today. The President was brilliant. He called the GOP to account for for their campaign of misinformation about healthcare reform and the economic stimulus, but did it with respect and a sincere invitation to Republicans to work with him in the nation’s best interest. The President was articulate and knew his facts, including detailed knowledge of Republican counter proposals. He was warm and human in demeanor and gentle but firm in his criticisms, using self-deprecating humor effectively to put the room at ease. I have never seen a more brilliant performance by a President. Never.

You can hear Congressman Roskam pose his question at about 67:15.

Roskam Spends Tax Dollars on Another Political Mailing to Scare Constituents

RSR — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 18:30:42 +0000

More mail from Peter Roskam yesterday. This time a piece designed to scare me about the national debt. On the back, next to Roskam’s signature, it tells me “This mailing was prepared, published and mailed at taxpayer expense. This is a service to the the citizens of the Sixth Congressional District of Illinois.” Right next to the pretty glossy photo of rich white people walking in a park, probably in Wheaton.

So how is this a service? A service to the residents of the sixth might be a mailer that told the victims of the Bush financial collapse how to get job re-training and unemployment benefits, and food stamps, and suicide counseling. No, this is a political message, designed to help Roskam’s party defeat the efforts of President Obama to make things better for ordinary Americans. Pretty ironic when you think about it – Roskam’s spending our tax dollars to print and mail this political message railing about the national debt and excessive spending. What an ass. Based on their polling, Roskam and his Republican colleagues believe that debt and budget deficits are one area where President Obama is potentially vulnerable and so they’re wasting our money on propaganda like this.

Roskam says that “we’re at near historic debt levels, the likes of which have not been seen since WWII: the national debt is over $11 trillion dollars and growing rapidly.” Well, that’s true enough. But where did all that debt come from? The New York Times’ David Leonhardt did a great job analyzing the growth of budget deficitsback in June: America’s Sea of Red Ink Was Years in the Making.

It all began when George Bush took office in 2001. As the last Democratic president left office, he handed President Bush a booming economy and a budget surplus projected at $800 billion annually through 2012. Under Bush, the nation plunged into recession in 2001 and the country was forced to increase spending on economic relief while tax revenues decreased. Meanwhile Bush started two expensive wars, one of them inargueably elective, and spent billions on a Medicare prescription drug benefit that was largely a gift to insurance and pharmaceutical companies. So as spending soared and tax revenues decreased, what does Bush do: why give huge tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans, further decreasing revenues and increasing the deficit.

Bush’s economic policies resulted in his second recession, the present one, that began in 2007. Again tax revenues plummeted and safety net spending increased. And then then the mortgage and banking crisis, a product of Bush’s anything goes anti-regulatory policies. Bush is forced to bailout the banks, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac to prevent a global economic collapse, further increasing the deficit. Bush leaves office and hands President Obama a $1.3 trillion deficit, two wars with no end in sight, and an economy in ruins.

Leonhardt breaks down responsibility for the deficit like this:

You can think of that roughly $2 trillion swing as coming from four broad categories: the business cycle, President George W. Bush’s policies, policies from the Bush years that are scheduled to expire but that Mr. Obama has chosen to extend, and new policies proposed by Mr. Obama.

The first category — the business cycle — accounts for 37 percent of the $2 trillion swing. It’s a reflection of the fact that both the 2001 recession and the current one reduced tax revenue, required more spending on safety-net programs and changed economists’ assumptions about how much in taxes the government would collect in future years.

About 33 percent of the swing stems from new legislation signed by Mr. Bush. That legislation, like his tax cuts and the Medicare prescription drug benefit, not only continue to cost the government but have also increased interest payments on the national debt.

Mr. Obama’s main contribution to the deficit is his extension of several Bush policies, like the Iraq war and tax cuts for households making less than $250,000. Such policies — together with the Wall Street bailout, which was signed by Mr. Bush and supported by Mr. Obama — account for 20 percent of the swing.

About 7 percent comes from the stimulus bill that Mr. Obama signed in February. And only 3 percent comes from Mr. Obama’s agenda on health care, education, energy and other areas.

So about 10 percent of the present deficit is attributable to President Obama’s policies: 7 percent to economic stimulus to pull the nation out of the economic crisis he inherited from an incompetent Repupublican administration and 3 percent related to his new domestic programs. 3 percent!

If Peter Roskam were serious about reducing the deficit he would:

Stop wasting tax dollars on political mailings and telephone campaigns
Start working to repeal the irresponsible Bush tax cuts
Start working to disengage the country from the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that he has supported and to reduce military spending to reasonable levels
Get behind the President’s efforts to fix the healthcare system
Stop working for more tax breaks to the wealthy like an end to the estate tax

But then we all know that Roskam is not serious about reducing the deficit. His only interest is in using it to make things more difficult for the President in hopes of boosting his party’s political fortune.

Peter Roskam’s Conduct in Honduras Is Treasonous

RSR — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:23:46 +0000

Foreign Policy’s The Cable published this piece on Peter Roskam’s recent trip to Honduras to meet with Roberto Micheletti and other members of the right-wing junta that overthrew Honduras’s Democratically-elected president in June. Roskam was interviewed for the article:

Congressman Peter Roskam, R-Ill, also spoke with The Cable just after returning from Tegucigalpa to talk about his delegation and the strategy behind the GOP’s controversial engagement approach…

Although the State Department tried to prevent the delegation from going, U.S. consular officials did assist the delegation logistically, but did not participate in the meetings, Roskam said. The delegation also had a tense meeting with U.S. Amb. Hugo Llorens, in which Roskam described him as being “very defensive.”

“The very consistent theme that was coming across was a sense of bewilderment from all the Hondurans we were meeting with at their treatment by the United States,” Roskam related.

Micheletti acknowledged to the group that he did not have the authority to physically remove Zelaya from the country, but he seeks communication with the U.S. government and was not pleased that the State Department had cut him off.

The conclusion Roskam drew from the trip was that the problem in Honduras won’t be solved until the Nov. 29 election, in which neither Micheletti nor Zelaya is running — that is, if it can meet reasonable standards of freedom and fairness.

U.S. trade with Honduras is at stake, Roskam argued, and is needed to counter the expanding regional influence of anti-American forces such as Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez.

This is unbelieveably arrogant, and, I believe, treasonous.

First off, the Republican Party is not entitled to conduct an alternative foreign policy. They lost the Presidential election in November, in no small part because of the horrible mess they made of U.S. relations with the rest of the world. They are neither competent to or empowered with conducting foreign policy. That is the role of President Obama.

Second, the policy of the United States of America, as defined by the President, is that Manuel Zelaya was illegally deposed from power and that the government of Roberto Micheletti is illegitimate and must restore Zelaya to power. Micheletti admitted to Roskam that he lacked authority for his actions. This policy is shared by the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and the European Union. The men Roskam met with constitute a criminal regime and consequently are enemies of the United States.

Third, since Roskam is clearly not acting on behalf of the United States, on whose behalf is he acting? Well, clearly, the criminal dictator Micheletti, who seized power and then terminated the constitutional rights of the press and the people of Honduras. But Roskam told us who he was really acting for when he said this was about trade. He is acting on behalf of the huge U.S. based corporations that do business in Latin America and don’t like the democratically-elected governments because they are supportive of higher wages and better working conditions for those who they employ, endangering their obscene profits.

So Roskam’s project in Honduras is to subvert the legitimate foreign policy of the United States, and give aid and comfort to its enemies, the criminal junta in Honduras, on behalf of another power, the multinational corporations.That sounds like treason to me.

And he complains that the U.S. ambassador is defensive??

Fortunately, in this country, we have the possibility of free and fair elections, at least while the Republicans remain in the minority. 6th District voters should overthrow the treasonous Roskam at the polls in 2010.

Where’s Peter Roskams Healthcare Plan?

RSR — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 03:41:25 +0000

Peter Roskam appeared on Fox Chicago Sunday yesterday and, I must say, our Congressman was looking particularly dreamy. The friendly Fox News team quizzed Pete again about the Joe Wilson outburst during President Obama’s speech last week and Roskam describes the “thud” he felt at hearing Wilson cry out “you lie” to the President when Obama said his plan would provide no coverage for undocumented workers. When I look at the pictures though, I’m pretty sure that the only “thud” Roskam experienced came much later when he saw his picture in the New York Times. In the picture that showed Wilson shouting, Roskam exhibits no reaction to Wilson. It does look like he’s reacting negatively to the President himself, though not shouting like his buddy from South Carolina. And notice in the interview how Roskam quickly changes the subject when the interviewer comments that, in the picture, Roskam didn’t look at Wilson:

In an interesting post, FDL questions whether the Wilson shout was planned because of the lack of reaction by Roskam. But enough about Wilson.

Roskam only does safe interviews and this one was no exception. Fox gave him free air time to rehash his same tired obstructionist Republican talking points.

Roskam remarks that we need more clarity regarding the issue of coverage for illegal immigrants. I really don’t know how you can get any more clear than the President:

There are also those who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false. The reforms — the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.

Personally, I feel undocumented workers should be covered. They are human beings who work hard for us, they pay taxes too, and we are all presently paying through the nose for ineffective care for them in emergency rooms. Why not provide them with lower cost effective health care while they are among us. But I know that won’t fly. Roskam seems to think that the paltry 30 million uninsured Americans remaining after you eliminate the undocumented are hardly worth bothering about.

Roskam says that polls show that the majority of Americans are opposed to a public option. But in a recent NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, “76 percent of respondents said it was either “extremely” or “quite” important to “give people a choice of both a public plan administered by the federal government and a private plan for their health insurance.” A CBS News/Nework Times poll in June found that 72% of respondents support a government-sponsored health care plan to compete with private insurers. Even a Washington Post/ABC News poll conducted this month after all the August teabag nonsense shows 55% support. (A poll of Congressmen receiving hefty campaign contributions from the healthcare industry would probably show weaker support). Roskam’s assessment of public opinion is, at best, disingenuous.

Listen to the Fox interviewer helpfully remind Roskam of his principal talking point that a public option “is opening the door to single-payer in the United States”. Apparently Roskam had gone off script. A single-payer plan is not, of course, what the President is proposing:

Now, I have no interest in putting insurance companies out of business. They provide a legitimate service, and employ a lot of our friends and neighbors. I just want to hold them accountable. And the insurance reforms that I’ve already mentioned would do just that. But an additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available in the insurance exchange. Now, let me be clear. Let me be clear. It would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance. No one would be forced to choose it, and it would not impact those of you who already have insurance. In fact, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, we believe that less than 5 percent of Americans would sign up.

Despite all this, the insurance companies and their allies don’t like this idea. They argue that these private companies can’t fairly compete with the government. And they’d be right if taxpayers were subsidizing this public insurance option. But they won’t be. I’ve insisted that like any private insurance company, the public insurance option would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects. But by avoiding some of the overhead that gets eaten up at private companies by profits and excessive administrative costs and executive salaries, it could provide a good deal for consumers, and would also keep pressure on private insurers to keep their policies affordable and treat their customers better, the same way public colleges and universities provide additional choice and competition to students without in any way inhibiting a vibrant system of private colleges and universities.

Now, it is — it’s worth noting that a strong majority of Americans still favor a public insurance option of the sort I’ve proposed tonight. But its impact shouldn’t be exaggerated — by the left or the right or the media. It is only one part of my plan, and shouldn’t be used as a handy excuse for the usual Washington ideological battles. To my progressive friends, I would remind you that for decades, the driving idea behind reform has been to end insurance company abuses and make coverage available for those without it. The public option — the public option is only a means to that end — and we should remain open to other ideas that accomplish our ultimate goal. And to my Republican friends, I say that rather than making wild claims about a government takeover of health care, we should work together to address any legitimate concerns you may have.

Peter Roskam loves to go on TV and radio and talk down the democratic efforts to ensure that all Americans have access to high-quality affordable healthcare. What we have never, ever, heard from Roskam in all these is his alternative plan for providing healthcare to the millions of Americans who presently go without.

President Obama last week outlined an actual plan. It needs some meat on its bones and I’ll admit to skepticism on some points but he’s laid out a path we can follow to address the problem of the uninsured this year. All we ever hear from Roskam is “no”, “can’t do it”, “won’t work”, “too expensive”. Well the time for “no” is over. If Roskam doesn’t like the President’s plan, he should outline his own plan to provide universal healthcare. Otherwise, Roskam needs to take a heaping dose of STFU and work with the President to enact his.

I have no real hope, of course, that Roskam will do either. The hallmark of Roskam’s brief tenure in Washington has been an appalling lack of concern for those less fortunate than himself. I have no real expectation that he will change now. Not while there is political hay to be made by trying to cause the President to fail.

Healthcare really shouldn’t be so difficult a problem for our country to solve. In case you haven’t already seen it, I highly recommend T.R. Reid’s Frontline report “Sick Around the World” below. Reid shows how five wealthy democracies have tackled the problem and have come up with solutions that, while imperfect, are pretty good, and haven’t resulted in a totalitarian state or economic collapse. All the noise that surrounds the effort to provide universal healthcare in this country is the result of obstructionist Republicans like Roskam manipulating their gullible base into working against their own best interests for political gain and to the benefit of their corporate sponsors.

The Company Peter Roskam Keeps

RSR — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 20:16:08 +0000

If you watched President Obama’s address to the joint session of Congress last night or have seen the news since, you no doubt heard or heard about Representative Joe Wilson’s inappropriate outburst during the speech. Wilson screamed out “You lie!” when the President stated unequivocally that his proposed health care reform plan would not provide coverage to illegal aliens:

On insistence of the Republican leadership, Wilson, a South Carolina Republican, today apologized for his outburst and his apology was graciously accepted by President Obama.

I was intrigued to see at the New York Times and at TPM this morning , that our own Peter Roskam was seated directly to Wilson’s left during the speech.

It does not appear that they are seated alphabetically, or by state delegation, because they would not fall together. They aren’t seated by Committee because Wilson is not on Ways and Means. They aren’t particularly close in seniority – Wilson was seated in 2001, Roskam in 2007. So either they were seated that way by accident, or they chose to sit together.

I don’t know whether Wilson and Roskam are close. If they were, I would not be surprised. The two have very similar voting records – 93% out of 2318 roll call votes since 2007 were identical according to Open Congress’ nifty new comparison tool as of this writing. Both Roskam and Wilson have been working to defeat President Obama’s efforts to provide healthcare coverage to all Americans. And Roskam has not been afraid to play the illegal alien card himself when he thought it could work to his political advantage.

It would be interesting to hear Peter Roskam’s thoughts on Wilson’s outburst, the nature of his relationship with Joe Wilson, and whether he admonished Wilson himself on his behavior, having been seated right next to him.

And what’s that angry scowl about on Roskam’s face?

Addendum: I just heard Peter Roskam quoted on WBEZ a saying he “cringed” at Wilson’s remarks. But the photo’s don’t seem to show Roskam reacting negatively to Wilson. Rather his attention and his scowl seem to be focused elsewhere. Notably, WBEZ did not quote Roskam as saying he chastised his colleague. Presumably, he did not.

2nd Addendum: The Daily Herald now reports that Roskam was “surprised” and “disappointed” by Wilson’s outburst. The camera does not show that. If Roskam had been surprised we would see him reacting to Wilson at this moment. Instead his expression, IMHO, seems to be a reaction to the President on the podium. Birds of a feather, I believe.

3rd Addendum: TPM has further background on Joe Wilson including his attacks on Sen. Strom Thurmond’s illegitimate daughter (Wilson is a former Thurmond page) and on Rep. Bob Filner who had the temerity to state that the U.S. had armed Saddam Hussein. Its a little frightening, though not particularly surprising, that Peter Roskam would hang out with this guy. Perhaps Peter would feel more at home if he joined the the South Carolina delegation. The climate is nicer (at least for the moment) and South Carolina is a better fit for a 19th century kind of guy like Roskam.

Last Addendum: It looks like, as of this writing, Miller has raised over $750,000 in campaign contributions since Wilson’s outburst on Wednesday night.

Roskam’s Medi-Fraud Alert Highlights Obama’s Vigorous Efforts to Combat Medicare Fraud

RSR — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 04:26:00 +0000

In his address to a joint session of Congress on February 24, 2009, President Obama, at the very outset of his administration, promised to “root out the waste, fraud, and abuse in our Medicare program that doesn’t make our seniors any healthier.” In recent days, we have begun to see the President’s promise become a reality.

Obama’s F.Y. 2010 budget proposal, released on May 10, included a $1.7 billion increase over five years to the Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Program. That program, under the joint direction of the Department of Justice and the Department of Health and Human Services, was established in 1996 by The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), under President Clinton.

On May 20, new Attorney General Eric Holder and HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius announced a new interagency effort, the Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT), to combat Medicare fraud. HEAT will build on efforts begun with significant success under the Bush administration:

The HEAT team will include senior officials from DOJ and HHS who will build upon and strengthen existing programs to combat fraud while also investing new resources and technology to prevent fraud, waste and abuse before it happens. Efforts will include the expansion of joint DOJ-HHS Medicare Fraud Strike Force teams that have been successfully fighting fraud in South Florida and Los Angeles. Established in 2007, these teams have a proven record of success using a “data-driven” approach to identify unexplainable billing patterns and investigating these providers for possible fraudulent activity. The Medicare Fraud Strike Force team operating in South Florida has already convicted 146 defendants and secured $186 million in criminal fines and civil recoveries. After the success of operations in South Florida, the Medicare Fraud Strike Force expanded in May 2008 to phase two in Los Angeles, where 37 defendants have been charged with criminal health care fraud offenses. To date in the Los Angeles cases, more than $55 million has been ordered in restitution to the Medicare program.

“We know these strike forces work. I believe a targeted civil and criminal enforcement strategy in these locations will have a substantial impact on deterring fraud and abuse, protecting patients and the elderly from scams, and ensuring that taxpayer funds are not stolen,” said Attorney General Holder.

Republican Congressman Peter Roskam recently established his “Medi-FraudAlert” blog on his Congressional web site as a “forum to discuss the massive waste, fraud and abuse in the current Medicare and Medicaid systems”. Roskam absurdly states these costs could reach $500 billion annually. (The total cost of Medicare is only about $450 billion.) But the costs of fraud are significant – 3% or more of total health expenditures, 10.5% of federal Medicaid expenditures by one estimate. Roskam’s blog does a good job of highlighting some of the Obama administration’s early successes in combating fraud:

June 25: A day after a $100 million fraud was exposed, yesterday, 53 people were indicted in a $50 million Medicare fraud scheme spanning from Detroit to Miami. The scheme involving patients, doctors, medical assistants and company owners, focused on Medicare claims submitted for unnecessary or never delivered treatments mostly for HIV-related drugs and physical therapy treatments.

June 29: Friday, eight Miami-area residents were arrested and charged with attempting to defraud Medicare for $22 million – having already paid out $15.3 million of those claims from Medicare. The Miami Herald reports that this was the prosecutors’ “first crackdown on home healthcare offenders in a decade.” In this case, two firms were raided, had their bank accounts frozen, and stand accused of filing bogus claims mostly for homebound diabetic services. ABC Home Health Care submitted $17 million in false claims since January 2006, and has already been paid $11.3 million in taxpayer money. Florida Home Health Care Providers filed $5.5 million in false claims since October 2007, being compensated with $4 million of taxpayer money.

June 30: Yesterday, a Miami doctor was sentenced to eight years in prison and ordered to pay more than $9 million in restitution for his part in a Medicare fraud scheme where he ultimately filed $20 million in false claims. The physician, Roberto Rodriguez, billed for fake HIV infusion services at six Miami-area HIV infusion clinics.

But Roskam, of course, has not created this blog because he wants the public to know how effective the administration has been so early in combatting fraud. Rather, Peter Roskam is using the existence of Medicare/Medicaid fraud as an excuse to subvert Democratic efforts to make quality healthcare coverage available to all American citizens, something to which he is ideologically opposed.

Roskam appeared this morning on WBIG 1280 AM this morning promoting his blog. He bemoaned the fact that physicians are reimbursed at such a low rate by Medicare and Medicaid due to the excessive expenditures on fraud and abuse and reiterated that he thought it unwise to pursue universal coverage with fraud so rampant. Roskam offered no solutions however for the 45 million Americans who have no health coverage. He did not even acknowledge them. Under the Roskam plan, they are on their own. You can listen to Roskam here:

Roskam WBIG July 1 2009

I think Roskam’s focus on Medicare fraud is a lame excuse for not doing what basic justice and decency require – that we provide healthcare to every American. If you agree with me, I encourage you give Peter Roskam a call and demand universal coverage now. Tell him we’ve got blogs aplenty, we need a health plan. (You can attempt to post a comment on his blog but I expect that will be a waste of time as they are screening out unfavorable comments). You can reach Peter Roskam at (202) 225-4561 in Washington or at (630) 893-9670 in Bloomingdale.

Proponents of Gay Rights Must Boycott Democratic Candidates

RSR — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:35:48 +0000

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Sometimes you have to give your friends a kick in the butt. Now is one such time. It is time for equal rights. No more excuses.

I solemnly vow that I will not cast another vote for or give another dollar to a Democratic candidate for office until the Democratic leadership brings to the floor for a vote, with the endorsement and full support of President Obama, legislation to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and to repeal the “Don’t Ask – Don’t Tell” rule. I encourage all others who share the belief that LBGT persons deserve all of the benefits of citizenship to do the same. No equal rights, no votes.

I have great respect for our Democratic leadership and for President Obama. But I believe their timidity on this issue is inexcusable. The administration’s defense of DOMA in a court brief was the last straw. This action was in direct contradiction to President Obama’s stated intent to repeal DOMA. It seems clear to me that witholding votes and financial support is the only way to move leadership to action. It would be great to see Senator Durbin put his weight behind this.

Our anti-equality Congressman, Peter Roskam, should derive no comfort from this. He has consistently refused to support LBGT rights and is certainly undeserving of our votes as well.

Peter Roskam Joins Smear of Obama’s Supreme Court Pick Sotomayor

RSR — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 17:40:42 +0000

Roskam on SC Appt.mp3

Listen to Peter Roskam’s comments this morning on 890 AM’s “Don Wade and Roma Show” regarding President Obama’s nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor of the 2nd Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals for the vacancy on the United States Supreme Court.

Judge Sotomayor has had a distinguished legal career:

J.D. from Yale Law School
Editor of the Yale Law Journal
5 years as an Assistant District Attorney in New York
8 years of private practice in commercial litigation at Pavia & Harcourt
Appointed by Republican President George H.W. Bush to U.S. District Court for Southern District of New York in 1991
Appointed by Democratic President Bill Clinton toCircuit Court of Appeals in 1997
17 years experience as a federal judge (John Roberts had only 2 years)

And Peter Roskam wants to reject her based on a couple of remarks taken out of context, without having any hearings and without having examined her judicial record. He thinks she has “an agenda”.

Come on, Peter. That’s bullshit. Its you who has an agenda. If this all about the law, why didn’t you speak out when President Bush nominated his dismally unqualified counsel Harriet Miers.

No, you are just trying to fan the flames among your extremist base by insinuating that she is a racist and will let her racists beliefs guide her decison-making. That claim is absurd, as Tom Goldstein has pointed out at ScotusBlog. This is just more obstruction on your part. Trying to create noise to prevent the President from addressing the nation’s real problems. If you think there are real issues with this nominee based on her judicial record, you should outline them. Otherwise your comments are just irresponsible and helping to make an ugly Republican spectacle even uglier.

In fairness, we need to remind readers that Peter Roskam himself has had a distinguished legal career:

Here’s President Obama speaking about Judge Sonia Sotomayor’s qualifications:

Weekly Address: President Obama on Judge Sotomayor’s Experience from White House on Vimeo.

UPDATE: I note that Adam Doster at Progress Illinois, has published a response to Roskam’s remarks that is, as always, more thorough and more polite than my own. I encourage you to read it.

Peter Roskam’s 8 Part Plan to Halt Global Climate Change

RSR — Thu, 21 May 2009 21:48:34 +0000

Peter Roskam has been conducting more of those taxpayer-funded dinnertime robo-calls, this time to roll out his new plan to address the threat of catastrophic global climate change. You can expect to see a lot of Roskam around the district during the labor day recess, talking up his plan. RSR has a sneak preview for you. The 8 part Roskam plan is staggeringly simple:

Ignore it. Pretend global climate change does not present any threat.
Burn more fossil fuels faster. Try not to be outpaced by China and India.
Cut taxes on big business.
Say no to anything President Obama or any Democrat in Congress proposes.
Get reelected.
Continue blind obedience to masters at U.S. Chamber and National Association of Manufacturers.
Cut taxes on big business.
Call Nancy Pelosi a threat to national security.

Jumping creepers, Peter, why didn’t we think of this.

Seriously Peter, saying no to anything anybody propses to address the problem of global climate change is not a plan. If we listen to you, we’re all screwed. You who would put the narrow interests of your corporate campaign contributors ahead of saving the planet – for your children.

Cap & trade may not be perfect and it isn’t going to solve all of our problems, but it is a start, a step in the right direction. It may very well be expensive for us all. But nobody said saving the planet was going to be cheap. Its just something we have to do.

If you don’t want to do cap & trade, then you tell us how you’re going to save the planet, not just how you are going to save your donors on their taxes. Put up or shut up.

Peter Roskam Sides With Credit Card Companies Over Constituents

RSR — Thu, 21 May 2009 04:35:13 +0000

Do you think it is fair for your credit card company to be able to raise your interest on an existing balance without notice and without explanation? Probably not.

But if you live in Illinois’ 6th Congressional district, your Congressman, Peter Roskam, thinks it is just fine, and he said so today with his vote.

The House today sent the Credit Cardholders’ Bill of Rights Act to President Obama for his signature. The Senate version of the bill, which was stronger than the original House version, passed in the House by a 361-64 vote. Peter Roskam was the only member of the Illinois delegation voting against this important measure designed to protect consumers from the worst predatory practices of the banking and credit card industry.

Provisions of the bill include:

Prohibits companies from raising interest rates during the first year after an account is opened
Prevents increases in interest rates on an existing balance unless a payment is at least 60 days overdue
Requires 45 day written notice for rate increases on new purchases
Prevents companies from charging over-limit fees for purchases without prior agreement from the cardholder
Requires bills be sent at least 21 days prior to the due date and that they contain a statement of the total interest and time required to pay off the balance if the cardholder makes only minimum payments
Requires companies to post clearly explained rates and terms on the internet
Prevent companies from opening card accounts for consumers under age 21 without proof of ability to pay
Eliminates fees for telephone payments
Prevents companies from applying payments only to the portion of a balance bearing the lowest interest rate

President Obama has pushed for this kind of action on abusive credit card practices and is expected to sign the bill. The President and the Democratic leadership did a great job of putting this together fast. It is crystal clear which party is looking after our interests.

Roskam’s opposition to this bill, while disappointing, was not surprising. During his tenure Roskam has shown little empathy for the plight of consumers, instead voting pretty consistently for the interests of big business, particularly the finance industry. Roskam also receives substantial campaign contributions from the financial sector.

Roskam’s constituents should take him to task for once again using his office to oppose their interests. Please call the Congressman today. You can reach him at (202) 225-4561 in Washington or at (630) 893-9670 in Bloomingdale.

Notre Dame Confers Honorary Degree on Child-Killing U.S. President

RSR — Sun, 17 May 2009 22:19:05 +0000

It happened on May 20, 2001. President George Bush delivered a commencement address at Notre Dame, focused mainly on compassion, and on his plan for establishment of religion through the White House Office of Faith-based and Community Initiatives. The President was awarded an honorary doctor of laws degree.

Now in fairness, President Bush had not yet distinguished himself as Torturer-in-Chief and did not yet have the blood of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians on his hands. But he had just come off a run as Governor of Texas, where he had proven to be an enthusiastic practitioner of capital punishment, sending 152 people to their deaths by lethal injection over his 6 years as Governor, a record pace in modern times. In order to maintain that pace, Bush had to deny clemency to virtually everyone who petitioned (serial killer Henry Lee Lucas being the lone exception) and execute all comers, including the mentally retarded. In this herculean task he was ably assisted by his toady, and future Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales. Much later, as President, Bush would attempt to institute a “fast track” for the death penalty to get things moving at a more satisfying pace.

And yet this monster Bush, is pretty much deified by the so-called “pro-life” movement in this country. Makes it pretty hard to take their protests at Notre Dame today seriously.

Abortion isn’t pretty. It would be difficult to defend it as a positive good. But the State compelling women to carry unwanted pregnancies to term is equally ugly. My judgment is in agreement with President Obama: abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. Women should be allowed to reach their own ethical evaluations of the option of terminating a pregnancy with the counsel of their families, physicians, and spirtual advisors. The State should not be allowed to intrude into this process.

I applaud President Obama for his stance in favor of allowing women to control their own bodies and I applaud the University of Notre Dame for standing up to the anti-abortion protesters in defense of the ideals of a university.

No related posts.

President Obama Needs to Grow a Pair

RSR — Sun, 17 May 2009 17:06:14 +0000

When it comes to gay rights, that is.

On April 23, 2009, the New York Army National Guard instituted involuntary discharge proceedings against First Lieutenant Daniel Choi, a West Point educated arabic linguist with 15 months service in Iraq. The reason for the discharge: Choi admitted publicy that he is a homosexual, which is equated with homosexual conduct under the military’s so-called “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. Thus far, President Obama, despite having promised during his campaign an intention to bring an end to this policy, and despite it being a stated objective on the White House web site, has failed to intervene.

I believe the President when he says he wants to bring an end to this discriminatory policy. I believe that he fully intends to do it. I just don’t agree with the delay.

The President should follow the model of his Democratic predecessor, Harry Truman, who in 1948, by executive order, desegregated the armed forces: It is hereby declared to be the policy of the President that there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion or national origin. This policy shall be put into effect as rapidly as possible, having due regard to the time required to effectuate any necessary changes without impairing efficiency or morale.

If an executive order is not a legally viable option, and I don’t think it is because the policy is statuatory, then he should publically demand that Congress immediately send him a bill for his signature to accomplish the same. Perhaps he could use his appearance at Notre Dame this afternoon to do so .

The point is that he should be doing everything in his power to stop the tide of involuntary discharges and it does not appear that he is doing so. The time for change is now, Mr. President. You need to stand up and loudly tell the country that discrimination against LGBT people is wrong and that, as a country, we are not going to do it anymore.