It made my blood boil.

Nonetheless, hours before the historic health reform vote, it’s important to address. Because it’s a classic example of the oversimplified and often erroneous arguments making this bill – a bill that will cover 32 million and reduce the deficit by more than a trillion dollars over two decades- such a tough sell.

My immediate instinct is go after this article for its moral repugnance. I can’t imagine, as a writer and, moreover, a human being, putting my name on a phrase like:

patients have no more “right” to demand service than a gambler does at a sportsbook counter.

The entire piece asserts a parallel between SICK people and gamblers – i.e. people hoping to “win” something they didn’t earn. And that, in itself, is outrageous. I think we can all agree that no one purchases health insurance for the thrill of the game. No one hopes to get chronically ill so they can ‘cash out big’ on a minimal investment. It’s a truly crass comparison.

But my emotional outrage is based on a feeling – apparently not a universal feeling – that as a developed nation we have a social responsibility to ensure every person has access to quality health care. And I’ve been advised appealing to the fundamental generosity and goodness of humanity doesn’t tend to fly with conservatives when we’re discussing health reform.

So we’ll skirt the ethical issue for a moment and discuss the merits of this amazingly simple-minded argument.

Let’s start with the misleading premise that the health insurance industry actually works like a casino. It doesn’t – as anyone with even a basic understanding of insurance knows. And so the analogy does not clarify the argument against forcing insurers to cover pre-existing conditions; it obscures it.

In actuality, insurance profits are not made by betting on the odds someone won’t get sick. If that were the case insurance would work on an individual basis and not in large groups – as it currently does in employer-based coverage. Rather, insurance companies create a large pool of individuals who share risk.

And yes, individuals with pre-existing conditions are a greater risk and therefore more expensive to cover. But alternatively, if they’re not covered, we as taxpayers end up footing their medical bills anyway when they seek ER treatment. Take the case of ‘Million Dollar Murray.’ And he’s not an anomaly – there are countless studies citing uninsured individuals who run up 6 figure ER tabs, paid for by you. In a casino, the other gamblers aren’t expected cover other players when they lose their shirt on a bad bet.

That’s not to say the higher expense of patients with pre-existing conditions isn’t a reality – it IS. And that’s why the current reform plan mandates coverage for all people, whether or not they are sick. Adding millions of healthy people to the pool allows insurance companies to cover even the most expensive claimants. This is already proven in large employer-based insurance pools -where risk is spread over enough people that everyone is covered regardless of medical history.

Therefore the conclusion of this piece that forcing insurance companies “to take on more than they are capable of or willing to,” (read: sick individuals) will put them out of business, is fundamentally flawed. And the analogy that the insurance industry works like Vegas is grossly inaccurate.

The writer lacks an understanding of how insurance works. And he certainly doesn’t grasp what’s at stake. From the onset, he admits a fascination with matters of “wealth and ruin.” But I’d ask, is his attitude so flippant about life and death?

Education Secretary Arnie Duncan points out that this revision fixes the problem of dumbed down tests, an occurrence that was recorded in many states after the passage of NCLB by requiring each state to pass rigid and challenging standards.  One of the boldest moves by President Obama is a change in how Title I federal education funds is disturbed. By asking states to compete for them through grants rather than a per pupil formula the administration is ready to change “about 40 years of established formula funding and to change an accountability system that a lot of people are wedded to because it’s forced us to come to grips with the achievement gap,” said Bob Wise a former West Virginia governor who leads the Alliance for Excellent Education, a nonprofit group

Many of its detractors, especially among union leaders, have focused on changes to teacher evaluation procedures that moves away from certifying a teacher’s credentials and focusing on new systems that distinguish effective instructors by using student progress as its foundation. Both the UFT and the NEA have publicly commented that Obama’s plan will allow unnecessary micromanagement over local school district, massive teacher firings and place 100% of the accountability on teachers with little or no power to create change in the system.

While these sides fight it out take a look for yourself by downloading the President’s plan here.

“health insurance companies should have to compete for our business as individual consumers. Forcing them to compete, even through a public option would be better than an individual mandate…”

and

the best way to pay for those with pre-existing conditions is to “spread their costs among the healthy, among the taxpayers.”

Article here.

Video:

2.4 million New Yorkers take the bus every day, according to MTA statistics.  But the city’s buses are also some of the slowest in the country. According to the Straphangers Campaign, the M42 crosstown bus is slower than “a five-year-old on a motorized tricycle,” traveling at 3.7 miles per hour.

New bus-only lanes, like the city is planning on First and Second Avenues in Manhattan, could give millions of commuters a faster ride and more time to spend with their friends and family.  But without real enforcement, the new lanes will probably look just like the ones NYC has now:

Governor Paterson has included a bus lane camera program in his budget.  Assemblyman Jonathan Bing of Manhattan and State Senator Martin Dilan of Brooklyn have introduced a bill that would do the same thing.  A great many NYC legislators have signed on, and the City Council passed a resolution supporting bus cameras two years ago.  But the biggest obstacle to passing the bill may be Assemblyman David Gantt of Rochester, who chairs the Assembly Transportation Committee.  He killed a similar bill in 2008 (by pressuring some of the bill’s sponsors to vote against it), citing privacy concerns — even though the New York Civil Liberties Union helped draft the language to ensure that safeguards were built in.

Want to support this bill?  Until the end of today, you can send a fax to Assemblyman Gantt through Transportation Alternatives’ website.

So…

Hiram Monserrate didn’t seem to get the message on Tuesday and is apparently looking at running for State Assembly, you know, for that recently vacated seat of the guy who left the Assembly to replace (and beat) some jerk who was expelled for roughing up his girlfriend. How long before Queens will be rid of this infection? What other offices can Hiram lose a run for?

Or is it, as many of us believe, all just a continuing ploy to raise money to pay off his legal fees?

Ousted Senator Monserrate Gunning for Assembly (Gothamist)

What follows is an account of the last County Committee E-Board meeting complete with their Congressional Candidates Forum during which all the candidates running for Congress in Manhattan made their case to this select group of electeds (and us).

Special thanks to our Executive Board Representative this month Michelle Stockwell, who wrote this amazing update.

Want to get involved or learn more? Email ben [at] gomyd [dot] com

Executive Board Meeting
The EB meeting started on time, with hot pizza and an audience comprised of district leaders, community organizers and a few members of MYD. Keith Wright delivered a brief summary of what to expect – no voting, speeches from congressional candidates and no press. He remarked on Gov. Patterson, expressing the opinion that the Gov. should serve out the rest of his term, and that the investigations being conducted around him should take their course. Keith also brought up the Yankees tickets controversy, stating that the discrepancies were not “that big of deal”, since Giuliani and Bloomberg had attended many games too. There was also concerns voiced about the state budget, it’s schedule and the elimination of such programs as homeless prevention and summer jobs. The meeting concluded with a call to think about the voting process for congressional endorsements and a minor, but curious, suggestion of providing district leaders with ID cards.

Congressional Forum

Reshma Saujani: 14th Congressional District
The first congressional candidate was promptly presented, Reshma Saujani, running in the 14th. She is the daughter of refugees and her speech was marked by her family’s story. Other key points included: mobilizing a mostly uninvolved South East Asian community as well as young people, remarking on NY’s disappearing middle class, and the need for change of leadership in Washington. She also remarked on campaign finance, something of a theme throughout the day’s speeches. When asked what the differences between her and the current congress rep for the 14th, Carolyn Maloney, Saujani listed her opponents votes for the Patriot Act and Iraq War, as well as her feeble defense of pro-choice policy within the new healthcare reform. Saujani was enthusiastic, but there was a general feeling of distrust from the audience, a sense that seemed to be applied to all new candidates throughout the forum that day.

Vincent Morgan: 15th Congressional District
The next candidate was Vincent Morgan, for the 15th district, currently represented by Charles Rangel. With a vow to “keep it real”, Vince shared his life experience, from being abandoned, to dropping out of high school but later getting his GED with the help of a teacher, and getting involved in the community by working with Rangel. In terms of what he had to offer, Vincent went on to assert that he would not allow lobbyist influence, would go line by line through the federal budget and seek more bank regulation. When questions were opened to the floor, there were multiple references by the candidate on the “100 pound gorilla in the room” – i.e. Mr. Rangel and his future and the need to prepare for new leadership with Morgan contending that Harlem needed to face the inevitable fact that new leadership would be necessary in the near term. By the end, one of the district leaders pointed out that its was highly presumptuous of Mr. Morgan that he assumed the future had not been discussed. Nonetheless, there were no public remarks on what exactly those discussions entailed.

Bruce Hirschfield: 12th Congressional District
Bruce Hirschfield, running for the 12th, started with a call to “change” in Washigton and predictably how we live in the best country of the world. He also brought up that he was not a career politician, but a business man. He was hoping to fight for tax relief for local business, secure federal money for infrastructure and the healthcare electronic database, and create a environment ripe for business. When the candidate opened for questions, there were some heated words from a community organizer in regards to what exactly he had done for his community. He clarified that he had provided credit education for teenagers in local schools. He was later asked about immigration, which he thinks should be tighter. He was admonished by a fiery Maria Luna on his immigration stance, as she remarked that he “knew nothing”. He was clearly not liked although he had some pragmatic ideas. The fact that he is in the mortgage business probably did not help either.

Jerrold Nadler: 8th Congressional District
Jerrold Nadler was next, displaying eloquence and control over the issues, and a stance much more progressive than much of what the party represents in Washington. He listed what he had been working on, including: the need for an additional stimulus to help job creation, respect for marriage act, the fight against the use of the state secret clause in courts during civil liberties cases, the correct usage of earmarks, a new transportation bill to a lot more funding to public transport, and getting back the funding for section 8 (among other items). He made an honest analysis on health care reform, and expressed uncertainty on whether the bill would be passed, or if the public option would be included. There was also an amusing discussion regarding a GOP proposition to display Reagan on the $50 bill in the near future. Nadler thought that historical perspective on the late president would hopefully curb this proposal and joked that he thinks it’s “against the law to deface the currency” anyway.

After Nadler, Maria Luna wanted to voice what she thought was disrespect on part of the candidates and their lack of knowledge about how their communities run, although it was unclear at who this was directed. She also remarked on the unfortunate circumstance of how the only thing you need to be a candidate these days is money and many new candidates believe they can bypass the existing organizations.

Charles Rangel: 15 Congressional District
Next was the controversial Charles Rangel for the 15th. In a rambling speech, Mr. Rangel mixed National Security, the value of the dollar, and health care reform in a mish mash of Democratic policy. He also discussed his recent “break” from chairing the Ways and Means committee, accurately validating that the ethics inquiries have been a distraction to the work trying to be done by the party and Nancy Pelosi specifically. The audience was obviously enamored, and multiple rounds of applause and a standing ovation ensued.

Carolyn Maloney: 14th Congressional District
The final speech was by Carolyn Maloney of the 14th. Like Nadler, she was able to communicate clearly and with control although there was some gratuitous back slapping between team Rangel and team Maloney. She delineated the work she has accomplished over the last years in Washington, including: credit card reform, federal funds for the 2nd avenue subway line, 9/11 victim fund, domestic partnership rights and a resolution against the treatment of gays in Uganda. Her speech was often interrupted by applause and she received two standing ovations. When asked about her stance on Iraq and the Patriot Act, brought up earlier during Saujani’s time, she was pretty masterful at not answering the question at hand, but highlighting the environment after 9/11 behind her reasoning.

In summary, and from the perspective of an MYD member, the playing field seems to be extremely difficult for new blood. The inexperience of the “new” candidates did resonate against the more fluid and confident politics represented by Maloney and Nadler specifically. It was also clear that most of audience’s confidence lay with the established contingent, the tried and tested and the politics as usual.

As I’m sure you’ve heard by now, Jose Peralta beat Monserratte in a landslide!

With 94 percent of the vote counted, unofficial returns from the overwhelmingly Democratic 13th State Senate District showed Mr. Peralta with 66 percent and Mr. Monserrate with 27 percent. The Republican candidate, Robert Beltrani, an administrative law judge, came in third with 7 percent.

“Tonight we put an end to dysfunction,” Mr. Peralta told a crowd at a restaurant in East Elmhurst. “Our nightmare is over.”

Thank you to everyone who made it out to Queens to canvass, thank you to those who phone banked, and a huge thank you to the amazing MYD Media team who put together some memorable moments for our enjoyment.

Check out Ben’s video of Monserratte campaigning HERE.

Check out Chas’ in depth analysis of a stolen logo HERE.

Check out Chris’ super-villain HERE.

I’m looking forward to what we can accomplish this election season. Email Alex V (political [at] gomyd . com) for info on how to play a role in the field this fall!

On that note, the Census has sent out its questionnaires, and if you’re even thinking about not filling it out or sending it in, read on:

You see, there is a tremendous amount riding on this year’s Census. The political wonk in me wants to wax poetic about the Census’s effects on redistricting: the process which immediately follows the Census where we reexamine each State’s allotment of Congressmembers and redraw our legislative district lines, from Congress to City Council, accordingly. NY will likely lose a congressional seat, and our State Legislature’s lines will be redrawn to either promote or prevent progressive legislation for the next 10 years, depending on the party in power when the lines are drawn.

But, that’s not even the worst consequence on not fulfilling your civic duty. Our esteemed Borough President Scott Stringer just sent me an email that sums it up pretty well:

Based on the results of the Census, the federal government distributes $400 billion in aid among the states – a significant portion of which may benefit New York City.

This funding supports vital social service programs that may affect you or someone you know, such as the Medical Assistance Program for healthcare, Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers for public housing, Federal Transit Capital Investment Grants for transportation initiatives, Title I Grants for our schools, Head Start educational programs and many more. Without these programs, thousands of families would go without public housing assistance and New York City children would lack additional educational programs to help them succeed in school. That is why every person must be counted.

The letter goes on to explain that this is a community outreach effort coordinated by Manhattan elected officials and community groups to get the word out.  They have a Facebook group. Become a fan! You can watch a video from the Census below.

Also, watch Christopher Walken answer a Census on SNL 20 years ago here. The Census Bureau does not count candy bars or plants.

Districts
The start of the confusion is that there are many different “districts” that every voter belongs to. Lets go through the types of districts that are important to Democratic party structure from biggest to smallest, starting with the Assembly District. As a disclaimer, I am only sure of this structure in Manhattan. The state committee is the same everywhere, but district leader can mean different things in different Boroughs, and certainly the structure does not translate well to different parts of the state which can have assembly districts spanning multiple counties, town committees, etc.

State Assembly Districts
Each voter is in an assembly district, and each assembly district (shockingly!) elects a member of the state assembly, the New York State equivalent of the House of Representatives. There are 12 assembly districts that are within New York County (a.k.a. Manhattan), numbered from 64 to 75. After the 2000 Census, each assembly district contained about 126,510 people. Obviously that has changed over time, and the districts will be redrawn soon after the upcoming census. Every assembly district is represented in the New York State Democratic Committee (the state-level governing body of the Democratic Party) by two Democratic State Committee members: one male and one female.

Executive Districts (Assembly District “Parts”)
In certain counties within New York City, each assembly district is broken down into “parts.” In these counties, each assembly district can have between two and four parts. Unlike assembly districts, these parts need not be contiguous, but are always within the same assembly district. Each part is presented by two elected District Leaders: one male and one female.  District Leaders serve on the Executive Committee of their County Democratic Committee, and are more or less the NYC analog to Democratic chairmen of cities/towns/villages outside the five boroughs. Local Clubs, which often exist within one assembly district, can represent more than one Assembly District Part.

Election Districts
Election districts (sometimes called “EDs” by people who spend time on campaigns) are the smallest and most basic district type, and they are the building blocks out of which all the larger district types are constructed. The ED is made up of all the people who are assigned to vote on a particular voting machine (certain large EDs may have two voting machines, but you get the point). A typical ED has between 400 to 800 registered voters and never more than 1,000. Each ED can be directly represented on its County Democratic Committee by two (or sometimes up to four) county committee members.

Committees
We’re represented by various Democratic committees, that correspond to each of the districts above. Let’s go through them from biggest to smallest.

New York State Democratic Committee
This is the official arm of the Democratic party in New York State. According to Wikipedia: “The New York State Democratic Committee was established in 1792 by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. It is reportedly the longest-enduring political party in the world.” You can read their rules here. The New York State Democratic Committee has several functions: They elect members to the Democratic National Committee (DNC), elect the party chair and other officers, and nominate people for state-wide public office. Also, at the party’s State Convention a certain number of committee people need to vote for a statewide candidate for them to be on the primary ballot without having to go through an arduous petition process.

Elections to Democratic State Committee are held in even years, and are often uncontested. The positions are usually current or former district leaders,  active members of local Democratic Clubs, or politician’s hand-picked people. The President of the New York State Young Democrats serves on the executive committee of the State Committee.

A list of New York County’s (Manhattan’s) State Committee members can be found here.

New York County Democratic Committee
All of the members of the county committee elected from all the election districts in Manhattan make up the New York County Democratic Committee. It is the largest county party in the state and has the largest weighted vote at conventions of the state Democratic party (10.03 percent). You can see the results of last year’s elections to these positions here and read the rules here. As you can see there are a lot of vacant seats, which is why MYD ran the Open Seat Project last year and got so many young democrats elected to County Committee. The county party endorses candidates, even in primaries, and also elects the county officers. More importantly, the County Committee selects the Democratic Nominee in certain special elections within the county (Assembly, State Senate, and Congress).

Manhattan Committee members are elected to two-year terms. Manhattan and Staten Island are elected in odd-numbered years. Queens, Brooklyn, and the Bronx are elected in even-numbered years.

County Executive Committee
The District Leaders, along with the elected officers of the county Democratic committee, make up the County Executive Committee. A list of Manhattan’s District Leaders can be found here.

Local Democratic Clubs
Political clubs are exactly what they sound like–local clubs that help get Democrats (often their own members) elected to various political offices. They are generally organized within individual assembly districts (or even executive districts), and to be an “official” club they have to have a district leader as a member. Sometimes there are several clubs that have overlapping areas and clubs compete for district leadership positions. Since the clubs are made up of active, dedicated members, they are often coveted endorsements, particularly for smaller races. Currently, there is no easy way to look up your local Democratic Club. The New York County Democratic Committee is working on it, but in the meantime, contact Alex Voestch (political [at] gomy [dot] .com) for help finding yours.

You can look up your election and assembly districts here.

I would like to thank Al Benninghoff and Andrew Goldston for their helpful edits and additions to this post.