Eva of the Feinstein 1200 group has pointed out to those who receive her email updates that California's furthest-from-socialist senator has finally issued a statement on her position on health care reform. While not exactly a pledge to vote against anything without a strong Public Option, its the most we could expect from her on the issue:
Feinstein emphatically endorses a strong public option, and as an added bonus has strongly endorsed the goal of ending the insurance industry's long-standing exemption from anti-trust laws.
From her statement issued Friday, Oct. 23rd:
My greatest fear is that we pass health reform legislation and premiums continue to increase. I am concerned that without a public option, this will be difficult to accomplish. Private, for-profit insurance companies have no moral compass, and will look for ways to avoid any regulations included in the bill.
[Emphasis mine]
Such liberal talk from California's Iron Lady. Way to go, DiFi!
For those of you unfamiliar with her role in this, Dianne Feinstein is not on the Senate Finance Committee nor does she hold any special place in the negotiations over the language of the bill. She is just one of two senators representing the most populous state in the Union, one of the most liberal states, and one which is overwhelmingly in favor of a strong public option.
I and my fiance were two of over 1200 who visited her office in downtown SF, at the suggestion of OFA last summer, to express our views on health care reform. While OFA simply wanted us to urge her to support Obama's "efforts" on the issue, a single self-appointed volunteer who arrived early, stayed late and tallied opinions documented the fact that nearly all of the visitors to her office that week were asking the Senator to publicly embrace the public option (if not single payer) and throw some of her considerable political capital behind the cause.
DiFi's response at the time was nothing if not evasive, weak, and non-committal, and remained so for all the weeks since then. The rep from her office that spoke with us that day promised that the senator was planning on issuing a statement clarifying her position, "Soon," within a week, was the statement. That was her official statement every week since then, until recently.
The long-awaited position statement has finaly been issued, and it is impressive in its content, I must say. Here's some snippets:
Lessons From Around the World
I recently read The Healing of America by T. R. Reid, which I recommend to anyone with an interest in health care reform. This book examines other nations’ health care systems for information on how we can improve our system. The major lesson from the book is the following: The United States is the only developed country with a for-profit medical insurance industry. Other countries have private insurance companies, but they function on a non-profit basis, under strict government control. In the United States, only 80% of premium costs of medical insurance are spent on health care—the rest is devoted to administration, advertising, and profits.
Many other countries require employers to help fund health care coverage for their employees. Additionally, other countries have developed systems in which everyone is covered. There is no discrimination against those with pre-existing conditions, and no fear that an illness will financially devastate your family. These are lessons that the United States must bear in mind as we move forward with reforms.
What I Support
The top priority of any health reform bill should be to expand coverage and keep health care premiums low. ... I believe that any health reform bill must do the following:
* Provide a strong, national public option. Private insurance companies must face more competition, and individuals should have more options. ... I do not believe state by state options or co-operatives will provide sufficient competition or control costs. ....
* Remove the private health insurance industry’s anti-trust exemption. I think we need all the regulation we can of this industry. ....
Last week, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the "Health Insurance Industry Antitrust Enforcement Act of 2009." I hope people tuned in. I am an original co-sponsor of this bill because I see no reason that health insurance companies should be exempt from federal anti-trust laws.
[Diarists' note: This is the first I heard of her co-sponsoring this legislation.]
... Instead of focusing on regulating people, we need strict regulation of insurance companies.
...
* Strictly regulate premium increases. Private insurance companies should not be trusted to contain premium growth. ....
(Here's an excerpt from the book mentioned in Senator Feinstein's statement, by T.R. Reid.)
Strong words from a Senator who voted for telecom immunity and legalizing warrantless wiretaps. Nevertheless they're good to read. I have no doubt that this is the result of at least 1200 calls, letters and visits to her office since the "tea party" charades began playing in town halls this summer. Our movement is genuine and has more torque, even if we didn't make more headlines. The fruits of our efforts are finally beginning to pay off, as we have seen in recent weeks.
It is telling to note that Feinstein makes some lame excuses for not coming out with this previously. From the Matier and Ross column on SFGate:
She went so far as to tell The Chronicle's Carolyn Lochhead, "I just find that if you're going to remake a sixth of the American economy, it's very difficult at this time of great economic angst."
Protesters lined up outside her district offices in California, and she received more than 200,000 phone calls and e-mails.
Feinstein spokesman Gil Duran says his boss' position was misunderstood. What worried the senator, he said, was whether the votes were there in the upper chamber to produce a bill.
"She expressed concern that there might not be enough votes for it, but that did not reflect her preference," Duran said.
In other words, "I won't support something if it might not win a majority of votes from a corrupt and dysfunctional legislative body, no matter how morally correct the position." Now there's guts for ya, Alan Grayson!
I do not know if Senator Feinstein's recent statement will be matched by a voice that speaks out for the Public Option in the next few weeks as this gets wrapped up. But its gratifying to know that she is on record as being with us.
I will still lobby for changes in the way states are allotted senators. Two per state seems ridiculously un-democratic, given the behaviour of those from our less populous states, like Montana. And given DiFi's reluctance, during this fight, to use the political capital granted to her by the nation's largest state, it's clear that we shouldn't have to invest half of it in one place.