E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS From NBC's Mark Murray
Minnesota Gov. -- and potential presidential candidate -- Tim Pawlenty (R) today signed an executive order prohibiting his state from requesting new grants tied to the new health-care law. The AP adds, "The governor said he won't pull grant applications that have already been submitted or turn down federal cash in categories that fit with the direction that Minnesota has taken in health care policy."
Pawlenty is leaving office at the end of the year, and his successor -- either Democrat Mark Dayton or Republican Tom Emmer -- could overturn the executive order. (Dayton would most likely overturn it, while Emmer wouldn't.)
Democrats have blasted Pawlenty's executive order as a political move that's tied to his presidential ambitions. “After rejecting $7.8 billion dollars for his cash-strapped state where taxpayers are struggling to make ends meet and denying health care to a quarter million of his fellow Minnesotans, Tim Pawlenty’s executive order to state employees might as well have read ‘You will henceforth work for my presidential ambitions instead of the people of Minnesota,'" said DNC spokesman Hari Sevugan.
A Pawlenty adviser responded that the executive order is consistent with the governor's free-market principles.
Nevertheless, you can bet that Pawlenty -- if he does run for president -- will want 2011 to be about health care, in order to draw the comparison's between the health-care law and what likely GOP front-runner Mitt Romney signed into law in Massachusetts.
Interestingly, DNC chairman Tim Kaine is holding a previously planned press conference in Minnesota tomorrow with Dayton, where you can bet the executive order is addressed.
Leave a Comment:
They're feeloig pretty confident when they can throw away 250,000 votes.
What's that thing I keep hearing about "not doing what the voters want"?
Gophers. How appropriate.
The "health reform" bill will just lead to higher health care costs, and anybody that doesn't realize this is pretty dense.
It was sold as "bending the cost curve downward", but will have the exact opposite effect. Anybody that thinks that forcing higher costs on insurance companies won't result in higher premiums needs to take a simple economics class.
You do realize, of course, that simple economics will tell you that if less people default in paying their hospital bills (a likely scenario with everyone having insurance) that costs will go down.
A Pawlenty adviser responded that the executive order is consistent with the governor's free-market principles.
Denying health care to 250,000 constituents doesn't sound like a good leader at all. Sometimes your free market principles should take a back seat to helping your fellowman. Actually gaining an advantage for people in your State is the governors responsibility not personal principles. This is not an act of a Statesman looking to be President. It seems as though Republicans are working in concert to try make the President fail but i think its making them look terribly partisan.
Republicans free market principals are based on two concepts:
1) Laissez-faire
2) Caveat emptor
And a 3rd: ME first!
I think its great the voters get to see a preview of government under a Republican majority.
No healthcare for you unless you work for a large corporation. We're the United Corporations of America, folks, not the United States, and let's hurry up with that apology to BP.
I'm sure Rand Paul and Joe Barton will have us pay reparations to BP for damaging its reputation.
So I guess all you are saying is that all of the States have to take the cash so the Feds can beat them over the head with it. Force them to spend more of the shrinking resources to match the Feds mandates.
I guess you also agree that extortion, cohesion and mob tactics it the way you like to see the Feds work for us.
Really Really Amy B.?
You seem to like voting for folks who promise to bring you goodies. I think you are the selfish one who wants other people pay for what you don't earn and probably don't attempt to earn.
I really do feel sorry for you though. You have a very long wait for all of your dreams to come true through liberal policies. The have been trying failed social programs for the better part of 100 years with less tan desirable results. Otherwise you would be happy with all of the magnificant programs that let you stay home and watch Opra all day.
I bet if you tried to better yourself and stop waiting on somone else to "do it for ya" you might get to where you want to be alot faster.
If you keep waiting for soemone else you will be pushing up daisies still waiting,waiting,........waiting.
'UNCONSTITUTIONAL,' BUT CONVENIENT
Seven States Sue To Overturn Health Care Law, ……..
But Line Up For Subsidies!
Healthcare Reform Hyprocriscy!
States Suing The Government Are Claiming Subsidies From That Same Government Law
WASHINGTON — More than half a dozen states suing to overturn President Barack Obama's health care law are also claiming its subsidies for covering retired state government employees, according to a list released Tuesday by the administration.
About 2,000 employers have been approved for the extra help to cover early retirees, mainly private businesses.
But the list also includes seven states suing to overturn the health care overhaul as an unconstitutional power grab by the federal government.
The seven are
Arizona,
Idaho,
Indiana,
Louisiana,
Michigan,
Nebraska and
Nevada.
They are part of a group of 20 states that have challenged the law's requirement for most Americans to carry health insurance or face fines from the IRS.
They argue that the government cannot order individuals to buy a particular product. The administration counters that the mandate falls within broad powers conferred on Congress to regulate interstate commerce.
Interested employers include about half the Fortune 500 companies, as well as state and local governments, educational institutions, unions and nonprofit organizations, the administration says. A total of 16 states have been approved, and more are expected to apply.
"In these tough economic times, it is difficult for employers to keep up with skyrocketing health care costs for employees and retirees," said Health and Human Services Sec. Kathleen Sebelius. The program "will make it a little easier for employers to provide high-quality health benefits to their retirees," she added.
As medical costs soared in the last 20 years, employers have dramatically scaled back retiree health coverage. The share of large companies providing the benefit dropped from 66 percent in 1988 to 29 percent last year.
To try to hold off a steeper drop, the health care law provides $5 billion to help employers maintain coverage for early retirees age 55 and older but not yet eligible for Medicare.
The government subsidy amounts to 80 percent of medical claims between $15,000 and $90,000 – significant assistance to help cover high-cost retirees and eligible family members
Companies can use the federal money to lower their own costs, or pass on the savings to their retirees through lower premiums and reduced cost sharing.
Firms that receive federal help have to formally notify their retirees that they've gotten a subsidy.
The retiree assistance is designed as temporary relief until the health care law is fully in place in 2014. That's when competitive insurance markets will open for business, and eligible individuals can get government tax credits to help pay premiums.
The private employers approved for the subsidy include
Levi Strauss,
United Airlines,
Kellogg Co.,
Mattel,
Hewlett-Packard and
Dow Chemical, to name a few.
The Associated Press is also getting the subsidy.
AP is a not-for-profit news cooperative, owned by its American newspaper and broadcast members.
Four Of Five Healthcare Plaintiffs Have Lost Their Republican Primaries
As ThinkProgress previously reported, five GOP officials who joined the completely merit-less lawsuit challenging the Affordable Care Act ran for governor this year.
With Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum’s defeat at the hands of corrupt former hospital CEO Rick Scott last night, all but one of these five officials have lost their Republican primary:
This March, two attorneys general took the lead in lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of the health care overhaul:
South Carolina’s Henry McMaster and Florida’s Bill McCollum. Another, Michigan’s Mike Cox, soon signed on.
The lawsuits made them national leaders on the central national issue, and seemed tailor-made for Republican primaries. But all three lost those primaries, as CNN’s Peter Hamby noted of the first two last night.
McMaster lost to Nikki Haley, whose reform message trumped his series of ads touting his health care fight.
Cox, who also put his health care suit on air, lost to a wealthy businessman who ran on a non-ideological platform under the slogan, “one tough nerd.”
McCollum lost to Rick Scott, and there the message may not be as clear — Scott was also a leading national foe of the health care bill.
In addition to these three losing attorneys general,
Nevada Gov. Jim Gibbons, who muscled his way into the health care litigation against his state AG’s objection, also lost his primary seeking another term as governor.
Only Pennsylvania Attorney General Tom Corbett (R), who ran virtually unopposed for his party’s gubernatorial nomination, survived the voter’s scrutiny.
Of course, it’s hard to be sure just what message primary voters intended to send by choosing Scott over McCollum.
Last May, 54 percent of Florida voters said that McCollum’s lawsuit was a “bad idea.”
But it’s also quite possible that Florida Republicans were inspired by Scott’s decision to spend a portion of his vast personal fortune in a failed attempt to block the Affordable Care Act.
It’s also possible that McCollum’s bitter confession speech, which claims that voters were bamboozed by Scott’s massive campaign spending, accurately explains his loss:
“The votes today have been tallied and I accept the voters’ decision,” McCollum said. “This race was one for the ages. No one could have anticipated the entrance of a multimillionaire with a questionable past who shattered campaign spending records and spent more in four months than has ever been spent in a primary race here in Florida.
One thing that is crystal clear, however, is that
wasting taxpayer dollars on a frivolous lawsuit is never a good way to appeal to voters.
Every single health care plaintiff in a contested primary for governor lost their election —
hopefully this will inspire future candidates to abandon their counterproductive opposition to health reform
Simply love this comment!
“Interesting the States that are dead set against "redistribution of wealth" and
yet they receive subsidies from other states
because they can't generate enough income for their own expenses.
They are against social welfare
but they are for corporate welfare through huge tax breaks that feed the deficit.
They rather force grandma to pay for their medication than
to take away tax breaks to corporations that take our jobs overseas.
Hardball & All Others Push Polls, Polls, Polls Taken Daily, Weekly, Monthly
The Most In Our History and
Think About The Manpower, The Numbers Of Those Employed Being Paid Significant Salaries To Conduct These Polls Every Waking Hour,
They Change The next day, week, etc.
Yet Every Poll Released “Is The One”
Here’s A List OF The Polls We Are Confronted With On A Daily 24/Hour News Cycle
“40+” Poll Organizations Push On The American Public 24/7
Media, Newspaper, Magazine Publishers etc Organizations Conducting Polls
Enough To Make Your Head Spin It’s All About The Money &
Driving The American Vote In Their Based On Continued Beating Of These Polls!
Pollster
Date
Approve
Disapprove
AVERAGE
43.1%
52.7%
Newsweek
6/23-24/10
38
58
CBS
6/16-20/10
45
48
AP GFK
6/9-14/10
45
50
ABC Washington Post
6/3-6/10
50
49
Quinnipiac
4/14-19/10
40
55
FOX
4/6-7/10
42
53
USA Today Gallup
3/26-28/10
37
61
CNN ORC
3/25-28/10
44
55
NBC WSJ
1/10-14/10
43
49
American Research Group
12/17-20/09
45
52
Bloomberg
12/3-7/09
45
50
Marist
10/7,8&12/09
44
49
CBS NYT
4/28-5/2/10
44
48
Ipsos McClatchy
6/10-13/10
42
43
FOX Opinion Dynamics
6/8-9/10
41
38
Allstate National Journal
4/22-26/10
39
35
Democracy Corps
4/17-20/10
43
45
CNN
3/19-21/10
55
42
Public Opinion Strategies
4/11-13/10
42
45
McLaughlin Associates
2/24-25/10
35
42
FOX ORC
2/23-24/10
36
35
Public Opinion Strategies
2/17-18,20-21/10
42
43
Newsweek
2/17-18/10
45
43
Pew Research Center
2/3-9/10
45
42
National Public Radio
1/20-23/10
39
44
McLaughlin Associates
1/19-20/10
37
42
Rasmussen Reports
1/3/10
35
44
Tarrance Battleground
12/6-10/09
41
42
Gallup
12/11-13/09
48
45
CNN
12/2-3/09
40
39
Bloomberg
12/3-7/09
38
42
CBS News
Franklin & Marshall College
9/15-21/09
43
30
Predicted Electoral Math
Latest Polls Per State
Poll of Polls
Quinnipiac University
Rasmussen Reports Polls
Research 2000
Survey USA Polls
CNN
American Research Group
Insider Advantage
Zogby
Mason Dixon
Public Policy Polling
Strategic Vision
Americans lives & Impact by Media Polling & Dollars Made is pretty interesting:
How Can Americans Keep Track, The Media Counts On Just That and this is just a Snippet!
Example
Gallup Poll. Weekly tracking of registered voters nationwide. Interviews conducted as part of Gallup Daily tracking.
.
"Now, turning to this year's congressional elections -- If the elections for Congress were being held today, which party's candidate would you vote for in your congressional district: the Democratic Party's candidate or the Republican Party's candidate?" If other/unsure/refused: "As of today, do you lean more toward the Democratic Party's candidate or the Republican Party's candidate?" Options rotated
.
Democratic
candidate
Republican
candidate
%
%
8/23-29/10
41
51
8/16-22/10
44
47
8/9-15/10
43
50
8/2-8/10
43
49
7/26 - 8/1/10
43
48
7/19-25/10
48
44
7/12-18/10
49
43
7/5-11/10
47
46
6/28 - 7/4/10
44
46
6/21-27/10
46
45
6/14-20/10
46
46
6/7-13/10
44
49
5/31 - 6/6/10
46
46
5/24-30/10
43
49
5/17-23/10
47
46
5/10-16/10
45
46
5/3-8/10
46
46
4/26 - 5/2/10
45
45
4/19-25/10
45
45
4/12-18/10
43
46
4/5-11/10
44
48
3/29 - 4/4/10
46
46
3/22-28/10
44
47
3/15-21/10
47
45
3/8-14/10
47
44
3/1-7/10
47
44
Newsweek Poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. Aug. 25-26, 2010. N=856 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 4.1.
.
"Suppose the elections for U.S. CONGRESS were being held TODAY. Would you vote for the Republican Party's candidate or the Democratic Party's candidate for Congress in your district?" If other/unsure: "As of TODAY, do you LEAN more toward the Republican or the Democrat running for Congress in your district?" Options rotated
.
Democratic
candidate
Republican
candidate
Unsure
%
%
%
8/25-26/10
45
45
10
2/17-18/10
45
43
12
Ipsos/Reuters Poll conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs. Aug. 19-22, 2010. N=950 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3. Note: 6/10 & earlier: Ipsos/McClatchy Poll.
.
"I know it is a long way off, but thinking about the elections in 2010, if the election for U.S. Congress were held today, would you vote for the Democratic candidate or the Republican candidate in your district where you live?" If candidate from another party, don't plan to vote, or unsure: "If you had to choose, would you lean more towards the Democratic candidate or the Republican candidate?"
.
Democratic
candidate
Republican
candidate
Candidate
from another
party (vol.)
Don't plan
to vote (vol.)
Unsure
%
%
%
%
%
8/19-22/10
45
46
1
2
6
7/22-25/10
44
46
2
2
6
6/10-13/10
42
43
1
3
11
5/6-9/10
45
42
2
2
8
4/1-5/10
45
46
1
2
6
2/26-28/10
47
43
1
2
6
10/29 - 11/1/09
46
45
2
2
5
.
Excludes leaners:
8/27-31/09 Adults
42
34
5
7
12
Time Poll conducted by Abt SRBI. Aug. 16-17, 2010. N=912 registered voters nationwide, including 827 likely voters.
LV = likely voters. RV = registered voters.
.
"There will be an election for U.S. Congress in November. If you had to decide today, would you vote for the Democratic candidate in your district or the Republican candidate?" If unsure: "Are you leaning more toward the Democratic Party candidate or more toward the Republican Party candidate?" Options rotated
.
Democratic
candidate
Republican
candidate
Tea Party
(vol.)
Other (vol.)
Unsure
%
%
%
%
%
8/16-17/10 LV
40
47
1
3
10
8/16-17/10 RV
40
45
1
4
10
.
7/12-13/10 RV
47
43
1
3
6
AP-GfK Poll conducted by GfK Roper Public Affairs & Media. Aug. 11-16, 2010. Nationwide.
.
"If the election for U.S. House of Representatives were held today, would you vote for the Democratic or Republican candidate in your congressional district?" If unsure: "Do you lean more towards the Democratic or Republican candidate in your district?" Options rotated. N=890 registered voters.
.
Democratic
candidate
Republican
candidate
Other
candidate (vol.)
Unsure
None (vol.)
%
%
%
%
%
8/11-16/10
45
49
1
4
1
.
"Would you like to see your own member of Congress get reelected in November, or would you like to see someone else win the election?" N=1,007 adults, MoE ± 4.5
.
Own
member
Someone
else
Don't care
(vol.)
Unsure
Refused
%
%
%
%
%
8/11-16/10
41
45
5
8
1
6/9-14/10
37
55
4
4
1
5/7-11/10
36
53
6
5
-
4/7-12/10
43
51
3
3
-
3/3-8/10
40
49
7
4
1
1/12-17/10
43
47
4
6
-
FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll. Aug. 10-11, 2010. N=900 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.
.
"If the election for Congress were held today, would you vote for the Democratic candidate in your district or the Republican candidate in your district?" If unsure: "Well, if you had to vote, which way would you lean?" Options rotated
.
Democrat
Republican
Other (vol.)
Unsure
%
%
%
%
8/10-11/10
37
44
3
15
7/27-28/10
36
47
3
13
7/13-14/10
37
41
4
18
6/29-30/10
40
42
4
13
6/8-9/10
41
38
5
17
5/18-19/10
41
41
5
14
5/4-5/10
40
42
4
14
4/20-21/10
38
42
4
15
4/6-7/10
39
43
4
15
3/16-17/10
38
42
6
14
CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll. Aug. 6-10, 2010. N=935 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.
.
"If the elections for Congress were being held today, which party's candidate would you vote for in your congressional district?" If unsure: "As of today, who do you lean more toward?"
.
Democratic
candidate
Republican
candidate
Neither (vol.)
Unsure
%
%
%
%
8/6-10/10
45
48
7
1
7/16-21/10
44
49
6
1
5/21-23/10
47
46
6
1
4/9-11/10
50
46
4
1
3/25-28/10
45
49
4
2
3/19-21/10
45
48
5
2
2/12-15/10
45
47
6
2
1/8-10/10
45
48
6
1
11/13-15/09
49
43
6
3
10/30 - 11/1/09
50
44
5
2
.
"Please tell me whether you think each of the following political officeholders deserves to be reelected or not. . . ."
.
Deserve(s)
reelection
Do not
deserve
reelection
Unsure
%
%
%
.
"The U.S. representative in your congressional district" N=513 (Form A), MoE ± 4.5
8/6-10/10
51
44
5
2/12-15/10
51
44
4
.
"Most members of Congress" N=513 (Form A), MoE ± 4.5
8/6-10/10
31
65
4
2/12-15/10
34
63
3
.
"Most Democratic members of Congress" N=496 (Form B), MoE ± 4.5
8/6-10/10
36
60
4
2/12-15/10
41
56
3
.
"Most Republican members of Congress" N=496 (Form B), MoE ± 4.5
8/6-10/10
40
56
4
2/12-15/10
41
56
3
June,,,enough with your mouth,,,go sit in the corner and stop pasting.
June:
This post is completely unreadable. Get to the point or no one is going to bother reading this stuff.
Go, DNC Hari Sevugan--Pawlenty might as well say, "You henceforth work for my presidential ambitions instead of the people of Minnesota." Best words today.
Pawlenty is clearly running or at least planning to get into 2012--he's been to Iowa several times, shown up to support GOP candidates, and opened an office somewhere.
When I hear or see Pawlenty, I remember the 2008 GOP Convention where the lady introduced the "next VP of the United States----Sarah Pawlenty."
Did you see where Newt GetRich is coming back to the Hawkeye?