It's one thing that my area's congressman, Pete Sessions, continues to oppose the healthcare legislation that President Obama has signed into law. It's another thing that the .Dallas Morning News didn't say a word about Sessions' Democratic opponent, Grier Raggio, in its story about Sessions' appearance at a Richardson town hall Monday.
But there was something that Sessions said during that town hall that was buried well into the Dallas Morning News story that exposed whose interests Sessions fights for.
Clearly, he never has, and still doesn't, fight for the interests of average folks like me. And, as what Sessions indicates, he's willing to continue to fight for corporate welfare even when it means sacrificing the interests of average folks in his district.
More below.
Besides continue to lie about healthcare reform being a "government takeover," Sessions made the following observation:
But he (Sessions) said reports that companies are anticipating large costs because of the bill, including a $1 billion charge by Dallas-based AT&T, help to illustrate the downside.
"If we are able to repeal and replace this, we believe there should not be more hidden surprises," he said.
Perhaps Sessions is complaining about one BIG thing that the legislation does-- cut corporate welfare.
Reports the Huffington Post:
The crime that reform is guilty of: Slashing corporate welfare.
Under the previous system, major corporations were subsidized by the government to provide prescription drug coverage to their retired employees. At the same time, corporations could claim on their tax returns that it was they -- not the taxpayers -- who paid for the drug coverage, and could write the expense off as a tax deduction.
Health care reform cuts out that fat. The corporations still get taxpayer money to help pay for their drug coverage, but they can no longer continue the fiction that they're using their own money to do it.
Being forced to operate on a diet of leaner corporate welfare benefits will make U.S. companies less able to compete, Republicans argue. Removing the benefit will also force large corporations to compete on a level -- or at least closer to level -- playing field with small businesses, who don't get the subsidy. The charge-offs play into the line that Republicans are pushing -- namely that health care reform is a "job killer."
The Huffington Post piece continued:
So far, Boeing, AT&T, AK Steel, 3M, Caterpillar, Deere, Prudential and Valero Energy have all said that reform is forcing them to take significant charge-offs on their balance sheet. The welfare cuts don't go into effect for several years, but accounting rules require the reduction to be taken in the year the law is passed.
So in decrying the healthcare reform that passed over his opposition, Sessions has exposed whose side he is really on. He's not for us. He's certainly not for the 165,000 in his district without health insurance (as the DMN story mentioned).
He's for keeping intact a form of corporate welfare the legislation slashed.
So much for Sessions being a conservative against wasteful governmental spending.
When it comes to protecting corporate welfare, there isn't a greater champion than Pete Sessions. But when it comes to protecting average folks like me, Sessions is no where to be found.
I sure hope Sessions gets confronted non-stop about his remarks and is forced to defend his pro-corporate welfare position.