Niki:
Governor Patrick
There are two weeks left until Election Day and we need your help. This election will be won at the grass roots so we need volunteers to go door to door, make phone calls, and reach out to the voters of the Fifth District. Please, e-mail field@nikitsongas.com or call our campiagn headquarters at 1- 978-458-NIKI (6454) if you can help us send Niki to Congress!
-Katie
Please share widely!
It just hammers the point home. Votes in this district matter. While Ogonowski has tried to paint himself as a non-partisan his positions on issues (that he discusses) are to the extreme right. I’m still waiting for his ISSUES link on his web site. He’s against bi-partisan legislation SCHIP and takes Bush’s view on Iraq.
@johnk
Please help me understand your support of the SCHIP reauthorization bills.
<
p>
SCHIP money makes it to the state through matching funds. In other words, in order for us to see an increase in federal funding, we need to spend more.
<
p>
Take a look at the proposed bills, and tell me, how do you propose to increase the $12B Massachusetts currently spends on health care in order to rake in more of the proposed federal dollars?
<
p>
The senate proposal would increase SCHIP funding by 16.5% a year. At what rate do you think MA should increase its health insurance spending and where should this money come from?
<
p>
And lastly, if you propose that we fund increases in government health insurance through increased taxes, do you pay the optional 5.8% MA income tax, or do you opt to pay the lower rate of 5.3%?
<
p>
Yes, SCHIP is an important program for our most vulnerable citizens. Doesn’t it deserve to be done right?
It’s supports the legislation already passed and signed by Mitt Romney. Remember him? Never mind 300% of the poverty rate which was passed, without the federal funds we can’t even afford to cover 250%. We also know that SCHIP saves money with preventative care for children. I image you might disagree with that. The studies and conversation have been discuss here over and over again. On average you actually save $2000 per child. Think about that for a minute, how many more children do we need to cover in MA with the current legislation. That saving millions of dollars. The question you need to ask yourself is do you want to spend more on bad care for children or pay less for better care. If you’re interested enough search for SCHIP here and you can probably find the postings rather easily.
I’ve read through the side-by-side analysis of both the house and senate bills. Nothing in the changes suggests that the rate of matching will increase. So, the only way Massachusetts will receive more funding is if it spends more money. That’s the nature of matching funds.
<
p>
I am not arguing the benefit of providing health care to children. Nor am I arguing the benefit of subsidizing that care for children whose families can not otherwise afford it.
<
p>
My question is simply, how do we afford this?
<
p>
I suppose if you don’t accept that with matching funds, we need to spend more to get more, we really can’t have a discussion.
When Romney signed the MA universal care bill. We are already expanding our coverage to 300%, what Bush is doing is adding requirements that make it difficult to get additional federal dollars (or matching funds). That’s what we are talking about here. Should Bush veto the bill and the veto cannot be overturned, Massachusetts will need to determine if we are going to need to spend more money in the healh care plan.
who badly we need change here in the People’s Republik.
Hopefully, we can begin a change from a one party state to a healthy two party system with checks and balances.
…the Weld-Cellucci-Swift-Romney-Healey years were great, weren’t they?
a 93% Dem controlled State House which is the real power in this one party state. A governor without a sustainable veto might as well not be there at all.
Liberal Dems keep blaming repub governors when the real problem is the pack of the same entrenched career politicians that get elected endlessly. Until that changes ( if ever) get used to your taxes going through the roof year after year and middle class people are leaving because they can’t afford to live here.
…if you want a conservative elected to the statehouse, he or she should run in the Dem party. Party affiliation is pretty much irrelevant to the policies that a candidate espouses.
<
p>
It is interesting that Republican party hacks don’t realize that, and keep bitching and moaning about the fact that they can’t get more conservatives elected in the state.
LMAO raj. If you want to talk “hack” count the drunken and corrupt dems its pretty much 10 to 1.
The rally with Clinton was great! A real special event for Lowell. The fact that he drove from NY shows how worried Democrats are about this race.
<
p>
The Lowell Sun interviewed some folks in Lowell, and several men stated they were for Oganowski because he’s a “common man.” What nonsense! Niki must counter this ASAP! Oganowski is a Republican and they have NEVER supported the working people.
<
p>
He supports Bush’s tax policies that allow un-earned income (dividends and capital gains) to be taxed at a lower rate than earned income. So, if you dig ditches or teach children or design software for a living, you are potentially taxed at a higher rate than if you got all your income from your trust fund. How insane is that?!
<
p>
Oganowski opposes the expansion to SCHIPs out of fear that an illegal immigrant might get health care. Apparently, he thinks it would be good for America to have lots of children running around and attending schools without vaccinations. Oh, wait! His solution to the immigration problem is to deport them all (an impossible feat, but when has that ever stopped Republicans) – regardless of the economic cost to this country, never mind the human cost. Last year in Colorado, there were no immigrants to pick the crops, so they rotted in the fields. This year, farmers refused to plant until state authorities allowed them to use prison laborers. Other businesses who rely on cheap labor are hurting – they can’t use prisoners! The nation’s immigration problem won’t be solved until we recognize the facts. Immigrants do lower wages – and while that can hurt some segments of society, it also decreases costs for the rest of us. But, unfortunately, nativist sentiments are tremendously popular as always – you can’t go wrong blaming the immigrants – or whoever is unpopular at the moment.
<
p>