Health Care, Not Warfare Rally 10/4

About 60 people gathered at Joe Knollenberg's campaign office on Telegraph to urge Joe to change his vote and help override the President's veto on the SCHIP bill.

Reverend Rich Peacock urges Joe Knollenberg to change his vote on SCHIP.

Elizabeth Chenard urges Joe to do the right thing.

No More Photo Ops for Joe

Kids Warn Conservatives: No More Photo Ops
President Bush has vetoed expanding the State Children’s Health Insurance Program to cover 10 million kids, even though the government program is a proven success with broad bipartisan support. Bush is expecting House conservatives to sustain his veto. But kids have a message for them: You want us in your photo ops? You better vote for our health care.

Watch the video here. Then, send your own message to your Representative in the House: stand up for our kids, stand up to George Bush, and override the veto.

To learn the facts and counter the spin about SCHIP, click here.



Send Joe a message. Click here.

Joe to Michigan's Children: DROP DEAD!

I know that sounds cruel, but it's the truth. Joe Knollenberg and George W. Bush are on the same page when it comes to supplying affordable health care to America's children. $35 billion, the cost of 4.5 months of the war in Iraq is what it would cost to expand the State Children's Health Insurance Program, as the Senate overwhelmingly voted to approve and the House also approved, although not by a veto-proof majority. Joe Knollenberg was one of the Republicans that voted with President Bush, like he does 94% of the time and against expanding this extremely successful program. I hope you're proud of yourself Congressman Knollenberg. The children of Michigan were counting on you and you let them down. So what's new?

Joe Hates Children

In spite of Joe Knollenberg's pro-birth stance, once children are born, he doesn't give a damn about them, as evidenced by his vote against the State Children's Health Insurance Program, commonly known as SCHIP.

Joe betrays college Republicans on education

It's so sad. Joe is so scared of losing his seat in Congress, he's willing to do and say anything.

Joe Knollenberg is not a defender of education

I feel compelled to write in response to Joe Knollenberg’s recent letter to the editor in the Birmingham Eccentric regarding his legislation to provide a $5,000 scholarship for high school students that enter college and major in math, science, engineering or health-care related field.

Great idea Joe, but you’re a little late to the party. If I could ever get to meet with you face to face, I’d ask why you’re only now proposing legislation to address the education needs of our children. Just to refresh the voters’ memory, back in 2005, Joe Knollenberg voted to slash funding for primary schools by $784 million. Joe also voted to cut federal student aid by $12.7 billion that would have allowed middle class students to obtain low cost loans. That same legislation increased the interest rate charged on the loans that are still being offered. Now Joe Knollenberg would have us believe he’s on our side. The hypocrisy is overwhelming. When Joe Knollenberg was in the majority and he felt his seat was not at risk, he felt perfectly safe slashing education funds.

Now that he feels his seat in Congress is in jeopardy, Joe feels the need to introduce legislation. I say voters are smarter than you give them credit for, Mr. Knollenberg.

Joe loves war, hates children

Joe deserves to be replaced in Congress for this vote alone. Here's what the SCHIP (State Children's Health Insurance Program) does.
Washington, D.C. – A bipartisan coalition of Senate and House leaders today announced a bicameral agreement to reauthorize the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) for an additional five years. CHIP provides health coverage to American children whose parents do not qualify for Medicaid, but can’t afford private insurance. The $35 billion agreement struck by House and Senate negotiators will bring health coverage to approximately ten million children in need – preserving coverage for all 6.6 million children currently covered by CHIP, and reaching millions more low-income, uninsured American children in the next five years.

Below is an outline of the agreement, which is designed to target specifically the lowest-income uninsured American children for outreach and enrollment. The agreement does not call for CHIP coverage for children in families at higher income levels. Instead, it reduces Federal matching funds for future coverage of children at higher income levels, and provides incentives to cover the lowest-income children instead. CHIP coverage of childless adults and parents will be phased out to maintain the program’s focus on kids.

Investing $35 Billion in New Funding for CHIP. The agreement reauthorizes the Children’s Health Insurance Program, investing an additional $35 billion over five years to strengthen CHIP’s financing, increase health insurance coverage for low-income children, and improve the quality of health care children receive.

Lowering the rate of uninsured low-income children. The agreement will provide health coverage to millions of low-income children who are currently uninsured. The bill also ensures that the 6.6 million children who currently participate in CHIP continue to receive health coverage. Pending final Congressional Budget Office estimates, the reduction in the number of uninsured children will approach four million children.

Improving Access to Benefits for Children (Dental Coverage/Mental Health Parity/EPSDT). Under the agreement, quality dental coverage will be provided to all children enrolled in CHIP. The agreement also ensures states will offer mental health services on par with medical and surgical benefits covered under CHIP, and protects medically necessary benefits (EPSDT) for low-income children.

Prioritizing children’s coverage. The agreement makes several modifications as it relates to populations eligible for CHIP.

Pregnant Women: The agreement provides coverage to pregnant women as a new state option as well as preserving the options to cover them through a state waiver or through regulation.

Parents: The agreement prohibits any new waivers to cover parents in the CHIP program. States that have received waivers to cover low-income parents under CHIP will be allowed to transition parents into a separate block grant. The federal match for services to parents covered through CHIP will be reduced.

Childless Adults: The agreement retains the current law prohibition of waivers to allow coverage of childless adults. Currently covered childless adults will transition off CHIP. For states that have received CHIP waivers to cover childless adults, the agreement terminates those waivers after a one-year period, provides temporary Medicaid funding for already-enrolled adults, and allows states to apply for a Medicaid waiver for coverage.

Providing states with incentives to lower the rate of uninsured low income children. Under the financing structure, states will receive state-based allotments that are responsive to state demographic and national spending trends and allow additional up-front funding for states planning improvements. States that face a funding shortfall and meet enrollment goals will receive an adjustment payment to ensure that no child who is eligible for Medicaid or CHIP is denied coverage or placed on a waiting list. The formula also sets in place new overall caps on federal funding to ensure the program’s expenditures do not exceed the amounts authorized. The agreement provides incentives for states to lower the rate uninsured children by enrolling eligible children in CHIP or Medicaid.

Agreement Replaces CMS August 17th Letter to States. The Congress agrees with the President on the importance of covering low-income children have health coverage while taking steps to address crowd-out and prioritize coverage of lower income children. The agreement replaces the flawed CMS August 17th letter to states with a more thoughtful and appropriate approach. In place of the CMS letter, the agreement gives states time and assistance in developing and implementing best practices to address crowd out. The agreement also puts the lowest income children first in line by phasing in a new requirement for coverage of low-income children as a condition of receiving CHIP funding for coverage of children above 300 percent of the poverty level.

Improving Outreach Tools to Simplify and Streamline Enrollment of Eligible Children. The agreement provides $100 million in grants for new outreach activities to states, local governments, schools, community-based organizations, safety-net providers and others.

Improving the Quality of Health Care for Low-Income Children. The agreement establishes a new quality child health initiative to develop and implement quality measures and improve state reporting of quality data.

Improving Access to Private Coverage Options. The agreement expands on current premium assistance options for states. The agreement allows states to offer a premium assistance subsidy for qualified, cost-effective employer-sponsored coverage to children eligible for CHIP and who have access to such coverage. It also changes the federal rules governing employer-sponsored insurance to make it easier for states and employers to offer premium assistance programs.

Legislative language is currently being finalized, and will be available Monday. The House of Representatives will likely vote on legislation implementing this agreement on Tuesday of next week. The Senate will take up the measure shortly thereafter, to deliver a full renewal of the Children’s Health Insurance Program to the President for signature into law before CHIP’s current authorization expires on September 30.

Joe supports war with Iran

The text below is from Joe Knollenberg's Congressional blog

We Can’t Allow Iran to Go Nuclear!
Today, the House of Representatives passed very important legislation to strengthen the sanctions against Iran. As President Ahmadinejad spreads his message of hate at the United Nations and Columbia University, the House took a big step today in ensuring that America’s message is heard loud and clear: Iran must halt its nuclear ambitions and recognize Israel. Even when speaking at Columbia University, which has a study program abroad in Israel, the dictator of Iran refused to recognize the state of Israel. Ahmadinejad has stated several times that he wants to wipe Israel from the face of the earth. It’s time for the international community to take this dictator’s words at face value. He’s not joking around about his disdain for the people of Israel. This type of hatred and Iran’s continued underground activity in Iraq causes much harm to the already fragile state of affairs in the Middle East. I am proud to have been a cosponsor of H.R. 1400, the Iran Counter-Proliferation Act of 2007, and am pleased that the House passed this bill by a strong bipartisan margin. We need to tighten economic sanctions on Iran and do everything we can to prevent this menace state from obtaining nuclear weapons

.

This is so frightening on so many levels. What Joe doesn't realize first of all is that Ahmadinejad is the duly elected leader of Iran. He is not a dictator any more than George W. Bush is a dictator, although an argument could be made that President Bush is a dictator. War with Iran would be a disaster, given this administration's absolute incompetence at waging the war and occupation with Iraq. If Joe Knollenberg doesn't understand this basic fact then we need to do everything and anything to make sure that Joe Knollenberg is not re-elected in 2008.

Joe wins Chutzpah Award

I say we hold a party for Joe and 4 other Republican Congressmen from Michigan that this week had the gall to send a letter to fellow Republicans asking them to hold the line against the Democrats raising taxes in Michigan to balance the budget. Here's how the Free Press put it.

Frugal advice from D.C. big spenders

Let's give this week's chutzpah award to the five members of Congress from Michigan who sent a letter to their fellow Republicans in the state Legislature urging them to "stand firm" against raising taxes and concentrate on cutting spending and reforming government.

How much advice would you take from people who are part of a government carrying a $9-trillion debt and expecting to run a $160-billion deficit this year? The federal government has the luxury of being able to spend more than it takes in and borrow to pay its bills. The State of Michigan cannot do so, which is why all this wrangling over a deficit of $1.8 billion.

The federal government pays more than $400 billion a year just in interest on the national debt. So the real message from U.S. Reps. Mike Rogers, Fred Upton, Joe Knollenberg, Thad McCotter and Tim Walberg would seem to be, do as we say, not as we do.


Joe's got it back asswards again.

Dear Mr. President and Joe Knollenberg

The video playing in the background and the lyrics tell it all.

Joe Knollenbeg thinks George W. Bush is great.

Now this is funny. Mike Brownfield (Joe's campaign manager)now playing at the Comedy Castle.

Mike Brownfield ought to try out at the comedy club. Joe Knollenberg standing up for American workers. Joe Knollenberg stands up for the CEO's, not the American workers. Did you know GM held a fundraiser for Joe Knollenberg? Joe raised over $50,000 from the high level executives while executives at Delphi, a GM subsidiary, cut the salary of workers in half for new hires at Delphi. Is that standing up for American workers? Joe Knollenberg's policies are ass backwards for the American worker. Did Joe Knollenberg lift one finger to protect the salaries of the workers at Delphi? Joe Knollenberg may protect the salaries of high level executives, but he doesn't give a damn about the salaries of the men and women that work hard every day at factories around Oakland county.

Mike, you might want to send the audition video into Last Comic Standing. I couldn't stop laughing.

Joe's Hormones must be getting to him

Joe might actually be listening to all the anti-war rhetoric lately. I guess he is now advocating peace in Iraq. Joe's new slogan, "Strength Through Peace." Wait. I think that one is taken.

Is Joe Confused About His Sexual Orientation?

With all the Republicans being outed lately, including a Federal prosecutor from Florida that flew to Michigan to have sex with a 5-year-old girl, it looks like Joe might be confused about his sexual orientation.

Joe bloviates on fuel economy standards

I did a little research of my own and again find Joe to be long on slogans and short on facts. In an article in the Eccentric Joe again makes the case that higher fuel economy standards are too costly. Guess what, Joe? You're wrong again.

This picture kind of says it all, Joe's ideas are ass backwards.

I found this little Q and A at http://www.cleanmyride.org/faq.php

Q: Can't people who want fuel efficient cars buy them? Why do we need a law?
The number of fuel efficient models is currently limited. Most automakers only offer no-frills small cars to drivers who want fuel-efficient vehicles, while pouring their advertising money into the bigger cars that make them more money. Yet fuel efficient technologies can work for all types of vehicles, from sub-compacts to SUVs. Saving fuel does not mean sacrificing performance.

Some automakers promised to manufacture more efficient vehicles across the board, but those commitments yielded only about a 5 percent increase in the fuel economy of each company's fleet by 2005. This paltry improvement barely keeps up with the growth in gasoline use, consumer costs, and environmental pollution. Only through federal fuel economy standards can we lock in fuel economy gains throughout the automotive industry.

We need more energy efficient fuel economy standards because car companies do not voluntarily employ cost effective technologies that add safety and protect the environment until they are forced to do so. The government had to step in to safeguard drivers by establishing safety, fuel economy, and emissions standards--requiring air bags in all new cars, for instance, because automakers resisted adding them even though they saved lives. And the government should step up again and set fuel economy standards.

Q: Won't new CAFE standards raise car prices and cost jobs?
An increase in fuel economy standards would raise the cost of a new car by $1,000-$2,000, but will save consumers $2,500-$5,000 in lower gasoline bills. The Senate bill alone would save consumers $25 billion in 2020.

And contrary to myth, stricter fuel economy standards would create jobs. The Union of Concerned Scientists just released a report that found that the 35 mpg standard would create nearly 24,000 auto industry jobs and over 200,000 new jobs economy-wide by 2020.

And here's a link to a report from the Union of Concerned Scientsts pointing out how we can have higher fuel economy and more jobs.

So, Joe, please stop the lies.

Joe ignores supboena in Duke Cunningham corruption case

Joe Knollenberg has been subpoenaed to testify in the case of Randal "Duke" Cunningham. What does he plan to do? He's planning on ignoring the legal document requiring him to testify in the case. Here's the item from the Detroit Free Press Politically Speaking column on Thursday, September 20.

Trent Wisecup says Cunningham is a crook and ought to go to jail, yet Joe and Trent obviously don't think George Bush and Dick Cheney are crooks in the way they've conducted foreign policy, ignoring subpoenas in the attorney firing case, the president issuing thousands of signing statements, saying he doesn't have to obey laws properly passed by the Congress. I guess what's good for the President is good for the Congressmen. The law means nothing to Joe Knollenberg.

Congressmen likely to ignore subpoenas

Don't expect Michigan congressmen Joe Knollenberg and Pete Hoekstra to come running to the defense of a military contractor accused of bribing former California Republican Rep. Randy (Duke) Cunningham, even though they've been subpoenaed -- along with 12 other members of Congress -- to do so.

None of the 13 plans to show up at Brent Wilkes' Oct. 2 trial, as the House's legal counsel has told them not to do, apparently determining that the subpoenas are overly broad.

In case you're wondering why the two from Michigan would receive calls, here's the likely reason: Knollenberg, R-Bloomfield Township, served on the Appropriations Committee with Cunningham and had an office next to his. Hoekstra, R-Holland, was chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, on which Cunningham also served.

Cunningham is serving an eight-year prison term following his guilty plea to taking millions of dollars in bribes from Wilkes and others for government contracts.

Said Knollenberg's chief of staff, Trent Wisecup, of Wilkes: "We think the guy's a crook and he ought to go to jail."

Joe's health care prescription deadly

In a recent edtion of The Oakland Press, Joe Knollenberg trots out the same old tired line about socialized medicine and "evil" trial lawyers. I issue a challenge to Joe Knollenberg, go with me to see Michael Moore's new documentary, Sicko, then say that universal, single-payer health care doesn't work and that private enterprise does it better. It is common knowledge that Medicare does work extremely efficiently and their administrative costs are 2-3%, compared to 25-30% for the private health insurance industry. Another problem with Joe's plan, there are 47 million uninsured people in the country and more joining the rolls every day. Over 50% of the bankruptcies in this country occur due to medical emergencies caused by medical bills of people who had insurance.

I recently interviewed Adrian Campbell on my community television show. Adrian is a 25-year old woman who contracted ovarian cancer and had to go to Canada to get treatment, because her health plan refused coverage, saying 22-year-olds (she was 22 when she was diagnosed) don't get ovarian cancer. Then, to make matters worse, because she was in the movie, she was fired by her employer.

If Joe Knollenberg thinks his plan to offer a tax credit to employers for offering a wellness program is the solution, I dare him to walk a mile in Adrian's shoes. Why don't you come on my show with Adrian, Joe, and tell her how well your plan for a tax credit for an employer wellness program will work for her? I dare you, Joe.

According to the web site National Priorities for the cost of what we have spent in the 9th Congressional District of Michigan in 2007 on the war in Iraq, we could have provided health care to 121,000 citizens.

According to the Institute of Medicine, "lack of health insurance causes roughly 18,000 unnecessary deaths every year in the United States. Although America leads the world in spending on health care, it is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not ensure that all citizens have coverage." Insuring America's Health: Principles and Recommendations, Institute of Medicine, January 2004.
http://www.iom.edu/?id=19175

Quit blowing smoke up our butts, Joe. Universal, single-payer health care does work and it's time for America to take care of its citizens instead of fighting an ill-conceived war that President Bush lied us into for profits from the Iraqi oil fields.


Yet this is all Joe can say on health care.

In a shocking admission published in the Feburary 1, 2006 Detroit News, Congressman Joe Knollenberg is quoted as saying "Medicaid, Social Security and Medicare can't be sustained". Although many of us have always suspected that Knollenberg was out to destroy Social Security and Medicare, this is the first time he has been so blatant about his position.

"Medicaid, Social Security and Medicare can't be sustained."

Joe Knollenberg
February 1, 2005
Detroit News

Many have suspected that Joe Knollenberg has been wanting to completely disable important programs like Social Security and Medicare.

He and his fellow Republicans are still trying to dismantle Social Security by turning it into a privatized system, they just are not talking about it because they know the public disagrees.

Rather than try to convince the public, they are now trying to quietly change the program by sneaking some provisions into the budget bill.

Without any public statement warning voters that he and his evil henchmen (Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, JOE KNOLLENBERG, Tom Delay, Bill Frist, etc.) were again going to try to destroy the Social Security program, President Bush included the privatization of Social Security in the Budget Bill he sent to Congress on February 6, 2006.

Bush plans to not only privatize the program starting in 2010, but he is going to fund it by taking over $700 billion away from the current Social Security system.


Bush, Knollenberg, Cheney, etc. must truly be dedicated to the total destruction of Social Security if they are willing to take away a huge portion of the program’s funding, privatize the system so Wall Street Brokers can get richer, AND – in the interim, they are looking for ways to cut benefits for current recipients.

Shamefully, rather than tell the truth – that Bush and all the Republican’s in Congress plan to shutdown the Social Security program – the White House characterizes their position as “The President will also continue to promote comprehensive reform of Social Security to place the program’s finances on sustainable footing for future generations.”

Wow. That is a fancy sentence. Let me translate it into the truth:

The President will also continue to promote comprehensive reform try to sneak language into law that will eliminate the current Social Security program as we know it of Social Security and instead force Senior Citizens to invest their money in risky stocks – possibly losing all their retirement benefits – while making wealthy stock brokers and greedy Corporate Executives wealthier. to place the program’s finances on sustainable footing for future generations. Meanwhile, Bush and the Republican’s will try to cut benefits as much as possible to Senior Citizens making it even harder for them to pay their rent and buy their medications.

Please do not just take my word for it, look at p. 321 of Bush’s Budget proposal. It is all just plain as day. The White House estimates it will cost:

* $24.182 billion in fiscal 2010,


* $57.429 billion in fiscal 2011 and


* $630.533 billion for the five years after that


for a total of $712.144 billion.



For additional information, check out this site: www.socsec.org/commentary.asp?opedid=1216

This is what Joe says now:

Joe Knollenberg an enviornmentalist? Please.

Knollenberg's Anti-Environmental Record: Part 2

Joe Knollenberg must think the voters of the 9th District are stupid -- otherwise why would he tell us that he is an "environmentalist", when it is so clear from his voting record that he is really one of the most anti-environmental Congressman in history.

In a previous post we pointed out some of Knollenberg's anti-environmental votes and noted that we were unable to find even a single pro-environmental vote by Knollenberg.

Here is some more evidence of just how strongly anti-environmental Joe Knollenberg really is:

* Knollenberg added a rider to an appropriations bill prohibiting EPA from funding efforts to reduce greenhouse gases under programs like the Kyoto Protocol
* Knollenberg's biggest priority for years was to make certain that toilets could WASTE MORE WATER - rather than conserve water like a true environmentalist would propose
* Knollenberg supported a measure that prohibited EPA from tightening air pollution laws -- and even prohibited them from using their monitoring data to determine which areas of the country were meeting health based air pollution standards
* Knollenberg opposed EPA's efforts to use equal protection guarantees to assure that all Americans have clean air and clean water

In fact, Knollenberg is so anti-environmental, the Lana Pollack from the Michigan Environmental Council once gave Knollenberg an "award" consisting of a Ken doll with his head buried in a bucket of sand. It was a great metaphor for how Knollenberg treats most issues -- he hides from them -- but it is particularly appropriate for environmental issues because Knollenberg votes on them like a dummy with his head in a pile of sand.

It is easy to do a search online and find hundreds of articles about how anti-environmental Joe Knollenberg is -- but can anyone find an article about Joe doing ANYTHING positive and proactive for the environment?

Read what Joe says compared to what he does

Joe says he supports our veterans, yet his record is abysmal.

Joe Knollenberg says he supports the troops, but when given the chance put some money where his mouth is, he doesn't support them, he slashes their funding.

In fact, the Disabled American Veterans give him a ranking of 0.

* Voted against fully funding the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, guaranteeing them training and appropriate armor. [HR 1591, RollCall Vote 126, 4/25/07]

* Voted to continue awarding contracts to Halliburton even if the Pentagon's own audit processes found that more than $100 million of their contractor's costs in Iraq were unreasonable. [HR 4939, RollCall Vote 60, 3/16/06]

* Opposed expanding access to the military's TRICARE health insurance program to thousands of Reservist and National Guard members, even though 20 percent of all Reservists do not have health insurance, and 40 percent of Reservists aged 19 to 35 lack health coverage. [HR 1815 , Roll Call Vote #221, 5/25/2005]

* Voted against granting a bonus to grant a $1,500 bonus to every American service member serving in Iraq and Afghanistan, including National Guard and Reserve forces. [HR 3289, Roll Call Vote #554, 10/17/2003]

Take a Stand Town Hall DVD now available for purchase

If you would like a copy of the DVD of the Take a Stand Town Hall from August 28, 2008, please e-mail Bruce Fealk at bfealk@wideopenwest.com.

Joe, will you let this kind of intimidation continue?

These protestors were conducting a scheduled press conference when the police (brown shirts) moved in to break up the press conference. The First Amendment of our Constitution guarantees the right of free speech to speak out in dissent. Do you think that our government is still protecting our Constitution? What do you think, Joe?