What does Steve Novick think of the work that Sen. Dr. Bates and Sen. Westlund have been doing at the state level on health care?

I am so seriously put off by the "Novick sees/Novick is..." refrain... unless Kristin is an official spokesperson for the campaign she's in no position to state what "Novick sees or is." And I'm a freakin' Novick supporter.

For the first time in the history of America. The life expectancy of today's children is less than that of their parents. This is catastrophic. And our infant mortality is equal to that of a third world country. Current U.S. adult life expectancy is down from #1 to #42. And dropping fast. These facts are what is known as EXTINCTION! indicators. These are the early signs of the final phase of the EXTINCTION of the American people.

You have to take the profit motive out of health care delivery. The profit motive does not work with health care. Or any other essential public service like police, and fire. The sooner everyone faces this truth. The sooner you will be able to adopt a real solution to the problem. The days of paying for health care out of pocket are at an end. Just like the mob days of paying for protection out of pocket came to an end.

HR 676 is the way to go. Single payer Universal National Health Care For All. Medicare for all. Accept no substitutes. The sooner you face this. The sooner you begin to heal the Cancer of private for profit medicine that is destroying this entire society. Other developed countries realized this years ago. It's a no-brainer now. See sickocure.org

Money, greed, and the profit motive has just decimated health care in America. And killed, and injured millions needlessly. Just for profit. But that is what large amounts of money, greed, and a lust for power always does. No one is immune from this corrupting power. The smart ones know this. And avoid letting them-self be put in compromising positions. But that is easier said. Than done. And very few succeed.

Most in the US go into medicine primarily to become wealthy. That is who the medical schools mostly choose. Most of the medical schools faculty are in bed with the drug companies, and others. And like the story of Dr. Faustus. They end up selling their soles. One compromise at a time. Until Lucifer owns them.

In medicine. Compromised care means. Injury, disability, and death. It's sad really. But HR 676 can fix this disgrace. Like it has in other developed countries. The only question is. How many more millions will be hurt, injured, and killed. And how many more of your children will die before their time. Before we fix this disgrace of private for profit health care in America.

I realize there will be a few people that have what they believe is good health care coverage. Who will want to opt out of a single payer system like HR 676. But let me remind you we rank # 37 in quality of health care for all. Down from #1. Never the less. A few opting out is not a problem. As long as all other Americans are automatically covered at birth through life. Unless they choose to opt out of HR 676. The government takes out 1.4% from your paycheck now for Medicare. All they have to do is substitute for HR 676 what they now take out of your paychecks for private health insurance. Remember, we already spend more on health care than any other country in the world. Right Now. We are being ripped off. And raped.

The SCHIP program is a desperately needed program for Americas children. But with the impending EXTINCTION of Americas children. And their current catastrophic health care condition. SCHIP needs to be extended to cover all of Americas children, immediately. Parents should have no hesitations, or financial worries about seeking medical care for their children. Whenever they have any concerns about their children's health. Especially in the richest country in the world. I would submit that any President, or politician that fails to do this for the children. Betrays their most solemn oath to protect the American people. Especially when you consider that all other developed countries have done this. And that we are the richest country in the world.

So get on it America. Get it done. You have been doing great over the past several months. Keep it up. And step it up. You have to force it, and take it. It's the right fight, and the right thing to do. Now is the time... Take no prisoners.

Novick looks like kissed Teigen's ass and she wrote so nice about Novick. Health care vs huge salaries. When Governor Kulongoski / Democratic Party raised salaries of directors of state agencies to $160,000 , Novick said no one word against it. So many government employees, yours should be servants, have so huge salaries, and for what? They do NOT care about who has no health insurance. And so many children have no health insurance, so many parents of our troopers in Iraq have no health insurance. Cutting these salaries will generate a lot of money for many children and adults. Where they are Novick and Merkley?

Pavel Goberman - Candidate for US Senator. www.getenergized.com

At the Oregon Summit, Steve Novick declared himself in support of Hillary Clinton's health care plan, Barak Obama's health care plan, John Edward's health care plan, Ron Wyden's health care plan, and Universal health care through a single payer system. That is impossible as they are mutually exclusive. So which one is it? They all have remarkably different roles for individuals, employers, government, and HMO's. Those different roles have profound a effect on how our society views the health care crisis and what values we associate with it. Steve Novick doesn't have a health care plan, he has a bunch of prominent Democrats that he wants to associate himself with. He is doing exactly what you say he is not: grandstanding.

Thank you bdunn.

It is all well and good to say someone else has a good health care plan.

But to the pregnant woman using her husband's health care insurance because it is better than what she gets from work, to the veteran who gets appointments postponed 6 months and then 6 months more only to be seen by a doctor who says "you should have been seen a year ago--we will schedule surgery as soon as we can", to the working uninsured person, to the person who lost coverage after leaving a job and discovers COBRA works better for some people than others, to the person having trouble getting insurance because of a pre-existing condition, it is time for details.

For those families encountering such situations or knowing someone who is, are they going to vote for a candidate whose supporters say "He’s supporting measures by both Ron Wyden and John Edwards which call for reasoned, incremental implementation of universal health care."? Or will they wait until they hear the level of detail discussed by politicians who have really studied the issue and show that knowledge when they speak?

This is why I have not chosen a US Senate candidate yet. Why the allergy to details?

Why not "Steve especially likes --- from the Wyden health care plan and ___from the Edwards health care plan because he believes that =========== is important"? Is it too much work to talk about details?

Seems to me I have heard more discussion of health care details from St. Sens. Dr. Alan Bates and Ben Westlund (along with presidential candidate Mike Huckabee) than from anyone running for US Senate from Oregon.

And how does talking about Gordon and SCHIP help the people with the specific health care problems mentioned above?

So far, it seems like both candidates are playing inside baseball--pictures of visits to various places, generalities about issues as if this is a debating society, talk of endorsements.

Is there any reason that these candidates can't just leave Gordon out of it for once and talk about health care details the way people who seriously care about the issue do?

Both the Novick and Merkley campaigns should prepare for their common foe to co-sponsor a bi-partisan "big issue" bill, with Wyden which will evoke a massive public response. Health Care, The Sub-prime Problem, Global Warming - you know the ones. Mark my words. Better yet, be prepared. Gordo certainly cannot rest on his laurels therefore, he's about to create some.

Kristin,

The federal/statewide campaigns I have worked on stretch from Tom McCall's re-election as Gov. to John B. Anderson for President in 1980 to Gary Hart for President in 1984 to Gray and McFarland and Hooley for 5th Dist. Congress, to Lonsdale and Wyden for US Senate and Kitzhaber for Gov. (I am leaving some out).

The candidates mentioned found a way to talk about issues important to them in ways which drew in other than "the usual suspects". I was local Volunteer Coordinator for Hart because the evening the local campaign was formed (volunteer committee in that corner, fundraising over there by the couch... etc.) I was the only person who chose the volunteer committee who had ever been involved in a campaign before. We were lucky to have a candidate willing to talk about issues in detail (and who had a long record of legislation proposed, public statements, votes cast, etc.).

This might work as an introduction to a speech on health care,

Novick sees health care as a labor issue. Imagine the day when people have the freedom to leave an oppressive workplace without fear of losing their health insurance. Imagine the day when a parent, caregiver or a student can work part-time and still have health care.

but where are the details? You did a great job of writing, but it is the candidate whose name is on the ballot. The ol' policy analyst himself has to know that the first sentence is a topic sentence to a paragraph without much detail. Imagining a better future is easy--the logistics are hard. If Steve is saying "imagine a better day" rather than discussing how well the COBRA system works and whether the private sector part of it needs more oversight and regulation, I know he is capable of better (I've known Steve for years).

If we had universal health care, part time employees and those who have been laid off wouldn't have to worry about health coverage. But does Steve favor an interventionist model or a prevention model? As I understand it, many policies don't pay for inexpensive screening but do pay if a problem diagnosed in the ER leads to hospitalization.

When I heard Steve speak a few months ago, the Q & A was more intelligent than the prepared speech. In the prepared speech, when talking about health care, Steve would say "Kitzhaber says..." as if everyone in the room was supposed to know Kitzhaber was a State Senator who authored the Oregon Health Plan and did a lot of work on health care as Governor. There were 2 people under the age of 25 at our table. Why should they have known that?

Kristin, congratulations on completing a Masters thesis--what was the subject? Will you have to defend it orally to a panel of professors?

That is the sort of intellectual rigor we deserve from Steve--and to hear it from Steve himself. Of the 2 main primary candidates, Steve has the better speaking voice, but some of his rhetoric makes clear he hasn't run for elective office before. He has the intelligence and background, but can he translate that to explaining issues to a general audience? The last time I looked at his website, he only had the paragraphs on some issues, nothing in depth. And care for veterans under "prioritized defense spending" instead of a Veterans category or at least under health care?

Just because Steve inspires some people doesn't mean the rest of us need to take him on faith. Part of his biography is his work on policy papers for Bruggere--but when newspapers did long profiles "the candidates on the issue of...", the articles generally ended with "Bruggere had no detailed position on the issue". I am being a nag now because I don't want that to happen again, and in 2007 it is still early enough to prod the candidates to be more specific.

Call me a skeptic or a cynic, but it has been a long time since I have been inspired along the lines of John Lennon's "Imagine"---which is what your post sounds like.

This can be a philosophical debate among friends--I know people who pose a hypothetical and then wonder why I am asking for details. (Often I use the domestic analogy of the difference between "we must clean the house" and "first we will clean off the kitchen counters, then we will mop the floor, then we will dust and vacuum the living room and dining room...".)

I am very happy that Steve and Jeff have inspired people who haven't been around politics for decades to get involved in politics. But I have heard more specifics about health care from John Edwards, Mike Huckabee, Howard Dean, John Kitzhaber, Alan Bates and Ben Westlund than I have from either Steve or Jeff.

And "imagine a future where..." or any other post by a candidate's supporter does not substitute for a candidate (or a campaign website) discussing such important issues in more detail.

A friend of mine likes the phrase "a vision for the future and a plan to carry it out". I have yet to see that from any US Senate candidate.

Do any of them get it? The government caused the problem with health care in America by over socializing medicine to the extent it is not completive, and we want to exacerbate the problem? U.S. Capitalism refers to an economic system in which the means of production are all owned and operated for profit, and in which investments, distribution, income, production and pricing of goods and services are determined through the operation of a market economy. It is the right of individuals and groups of individuals acting as "legal persons" or corporations to trade capital goods, labor, land and money (see finance and credit). See http://www.InteliOrg.com/

Finally a thought provoking blog about the inerconectivity (did I make up a word?) of economics, healthcare, politics and our social strata. Not so much Novick, or Westlund or Bates count here as the discussion of how it is all connected.

Interestingly enough I just finished watching "Crash" so perhaps that influences myy thoughts.

Our society is becoming more complex and weaved together. It is a tapestry. What you do to one sector (or fail to do) affects others.

Meanwhile Workers are competing with 20-38 Million Illegal aliens who have no care about Medical insurance, the E.R. works fine for them. American workers forced to compete with people that do not want the companies Health insurance as that would reduce their remittances they can Western Union to home.

Therefore Hospitals & DR.s charge extra to compensate for the huge increases in un paid bills via those that should not be here. example - Salem Hospital charges 15% MORE if you have insurance. Double digit premium increases for the last 15 years are not because so many are getting sick after all.

So why does Jeff Merkley do nothing to stop the magnet of Oregon Jobs & social services to Illegal aliens? Will those hundreds of thousands of Illegals now fleeing Oklahoma & Arizona & North Carolina & New Jersey come here and further burden our workers and our insurance needs?

Meanwhile Clinton & Obama want millions more to sneak in as they approve of the DREAM Act and Licenses to Illegals & Voting by illegals.

Attrition thru enforcement DOES work & as Democrats continue to pander to socio-ethnic special insterest groups and forget Americans and make US pay for the education, medication & incarceration of tens of millions, Democrats will lose support and Votes.

Solution? 20-38 Million Illegal aliens leave on their own because they cannot take someones job or Gov't services, ONE HALF to 2/3 on Non insureds are gone! WAGES rise and there will be many many many LESS without insurance here and insurance rates will go down(auto also). Capitolism, beyond your understanding, is about supply & demand, reduce demand and un paid bills and rates go down, silly commies.

Go away? Are you serious? Uninformed? DR. Madeline Cosman PHD., ESQ. was Published in the Journal of Physicians & Surgeons referring to the huge impact illegal aliens are having on health care costs and expensive diseases, the Journal does not Publish liars.

Your hit piece on Gordon Smith voting against the DREAM Act had most comments against the dream act and awareness that these illegal job competitors are hurting Americans.

CNN latest Poll shows 2 out of 3 Democrats do not support License for Illegals. 72% of New Yorkers do not either.

Discussing Health care without discussing causes for the dilemma are ignorant.

Kari, you are uninformed and I will go away if you only want this to be a propaganda machine for your narrow minded immature buddies.

I was not writing as a Republican anything, just as a concerned American, and yes I am a Native American.

Even if you disagree you will post this as freedom of speech is important to all of us, isn't it?

To support Steve's position on the effects of poor health throughout society, let me remind you that two of Europe's most conservative statesmen - Otto von Bismarck and Winston Churchill - promoted national health plans because they recognized their respective nations needed healthy citizens for a strong military and growing economy. So much for socialized medicine.

However, since there are legitimate concerns that switching to a single payer system immediately would be disruptive (for one thing, it would throw an awful lot of insurance company employees out of work), I would favor an interim approach to getting health care to more people, such as those proposed by Senator Ron Wyden and former Senator, and presidential candidate, John Edwards.

is a quote from Steve's website. It is followed by itemized reasons why this is a good idea.

There was also a comment "every employer has to pay something" and a comment about how the uninsured going to the ER can be costly and that cost is spread around to everyone.

That is true, but what about really small businesses--the gift shop with 2 employees, the tiny restaurant or farmers market that hires a few people extra people during the busy season? The "mom and pop" businesses of all sorts? The entrepreneur who has invented something and has enough business to hire 3 employees?

There are good Democrats who have run small (or larger) businesses who will tell you that the jump from, say, a sole proprietor to hiring some employees can be a headache. There are people who hire independent contractors (from sales to tutoring to a business whose star employee needs a personal assistant due to a recent disability, etc.) and thus don't deal with Soc. Security, workers comp, unemployment. How would they be required to pay "something" as employers? Would it require re-writing the independent contractor laws, the business tax laws?

Dealing with those situations would require more than just imposing an employer mandate. Often such debates center around whether "all employers paying something" means the employer of at least one employee or at least 5 employees or more than 10 or what number? And who provides health insurance for the business owner?

Sorry Rick, even if every illegal were rounded up and sent home (talk about a logistical nightmare!) there would still be the question of who insures the business owner and the 3 employees of a small business. Not to mention situations where there is a 2 earner couple and perhaps the husband's insurance has better benefits than the wife's insurance, so the couple is both insured under the husband's insurance. What if the husband's company decided in an economic downturn to change their employees' insurance?

Big picture is fine, but good legislation is eventually passed after the details have been debated and enough votes gained for the final legislation.

I am not whining. I just read a Washington Post poll which said that the top 3 issues people care about are Iraq and Economy/ Jobs (one point apart in latest poll) and Health Care.

If you think that when campaigning for Steve Novick, people will decide to vote for him because "All of those people are already paying something, they just don't realize it. Even if they don't provide health insurance, they pay with taxes, they pay with sick days for their employees, they pay with high insurance premiums for themselves. They pay and pay and pay." then fine, go to it. Use that approach when campaigning for Steve among friends, at events, etc.

But does any registered Democrat who owns a small business really like being described as "all the people are already paying something"?

Are all potential voters well versed in the Wyden and Edwards health plans?

If you think trying to give a heads up to political insiders about what it may take to win over the 95% of the population who vote but aren't political junkies is "whining", then you and I see the art of campaigning for office differently. I know a pregnant woman who has health insurance from work but is relying on the better benefits of her husband's health insurance. I know someone who took over a small property ownership business and is turning customers away because "we don't want the business to get too big".

One of those people is registered NAV and the other is a former Democratic activist who I met on the 1992 Clinton campaign. Each are now very busy with their own lives and not as politically active as many folks here.

If saying a US Senate campaign should reach out to those folks, and that the campaign should not assume everyone in Steve's target audience could already tell you any component of either the Wyden or Edwards health plan, is "whining", then you and I are definitely not on the same wave length!

I will wait until 2008 to decide which campaign better reflects the sort of candidate I want to see running against Gordon and hopefully serving in the US Senate. Neither Steve nor Jeff has yet inspired me to join their campaign.

Sorry, Kristin, but my complaint holds.

There is (or should be) a bold bright line between what you really know and what you think you know... between what "Novick sees" and what "Novick says." I'd be a lot more comfortable if you had said in your introduction something to the effect that "Based on considerable research and reading, I believe that Novick sees" or "Novick has stated that..".

I believe from reading your piece that you're a very bright and sincere person, but I don't know that.

And by the way, I didn't accuse you of flacking for Novick, I was simply pointing out that you wrote as if you know these things to be true when, in fact, you believe them to be true... and almost certainly with good cause.

kristin, thanks for taking the time to write your post. your larger point seems to have gotten lost in the details, but i think it's a good one worth reiterating - steve novick has made statements concerning the fact that the healthcare issue is inextricably linked to many other issues of concern facing our country today.

and i guess it's a valid complaint that,in his speeches, he doesn't imagine every single possible demographic that might be represented in his audience (small business owners, veterans, college students, stay-at-home moms, rodeo cowboys, &c) and tailor his speech to provide details that would be of specific concern to those individuals.

i hope this is the worst complaint we hear about him throughout the upcoming election, though.

This is for Stephanie.

I just posted a compliment to Jeff on another topic, then saw the link to this from Steve's site on the list of blogs on the right side of Blue Oregon.

I said I would compliment the first candidate who did something like this. About time someone did.

Good for Novick for adding this to his website!

http://www.novickforsenate.com/novick_vows_stand_men_and_women_who_defend_our_nation

But you partisans for one candidate or another need to remember there are those of us who have not decided on a candidate yet and reserve the right to praise or criticize any and all campaigns.