As noted before, I sought comment from local political parties about U.S. Rep. Rick Larsen’s announcement that he would (and now has) vote for the House version of a healthcare reform bill. The Whatcom County Democratic Party decline. The Whatcom County Republican Party made their statement, in the above link, and had a protest outside Larsen’s office Friday, Nov. 6.
Now the 42nd District Legislative Democrats have issued a statement thanking Larsen for his stance and vote:
Monday, Nov. 9, 2009 - Representative of the 42nd Legislative District Democrats visited Congressman Rick Larsen’s Bellingham office to hand deliver a letter (see the letter, right here), thanking the Congressman for his courageous Yes vote on HR 3962.
The 42nd Legislative District Democrats thanked Congressman Larsen for standing up for the people of the 2nd Congressional district, in spite of pressure from well funded lobbying groups who orchestrated an astroturf campaign against reform.
Within the 2nd Congressional District, Congressman Larsen’s yes vote on the Affordable Health Care Act for America will:
Improve employer-based coverage for 480,000 residents
Provide credits to help pay for coverage for up to 173,000 households
Improve Medicare for 110,000 beneficiaries, including closing the prescription donut hole
Allow 21,100 small businesses to obtain affordable health care coverage
Provide coverage for 60,000 uninsured residents
Protect up to 1,200 families from bankruptcy due to unaffordable health care costs
Reduce uncompensated care costs for hospitals and providers by $76 million42nd LD Democrats Chair Steve Lydolph said; “The Affordable Health Care Act for America may not contain all of the changes some of us would have liked, but it does much to help improve health insurance coverage. Congressman Rick Larsen looked carefully at the bill and made an informed decision with the best interest of his constituents in mind. We appreciate his vote to move health care reform forward.”
November 10th, 2009 at 4:26 PM
Hi, Sam-
Some of us are amazed and appalled at this “announcement” that the 42nd legislative district are so falling-down grateful to Rick Larsen for just barely doing his job. He ignored us when we begged him for nearly a year to support a good government option. He hemmed and hawed and wouldn’t even co-sponsor any bills or amendments to improve the House bill. Finally, local Democrats publicly censured Larsen. At the last minute, he found an excuse to clamor on board. The day before the actual vote, masses of us were calling his office and telling him he’d best look for another job. At literally the eleventh hour, he called everyone who is anyone in the dem heirarchy and said, “I’m voting for the bill” like he’d achieved his own personal wisdom and was ready to play hero.
He’s too much work for the people who elected him.
This official sounding statement was the personal opinion of a few who happen to have access to the 42nd letterhead. We elected them, too.
November 10th, 2009 at 4:43 PM
Methinks some of those letterhead accessors might have been on with Louder with Crowder!
http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=video&video-id=2689
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
November 10th, 2009 at 4:58 PM
“We didn’t vote on this” I sent you an e-mail seeking a reply per the rules to ensure your address is legit, however having Googled it, I see that it is.
However, I’m wondering why you decided not to simply use your normal moniker on here and instead decided to hide behind a different name?
November 10th, 2009 at 8:04 PM
I read that a congressman from California got a promise of a $128 million appropriation for a project in his district in exchange for his vote.
In an earlier post, I suggested that Larsen secure long-term power for Intalco, tankers for Boeing, or six lanes through Bellingham in exchange for his. Those were, of course, only suggestions. Many other opportunities were available to him.
I think he gave it away on the cheap.
November 10th, 2009 at 11:50 PM
So if I’d never posted under my own name and had always used a name like Davesix or
AFY I wouldn’t have been singled out for an explanation? Hmmm…..
Well, if you must: I didn’t use my real name because it was a fairly confrontive posting and I didn’t want my comment to reflect on anyone who hangs out with me. It was my opinion and I don’t want it to affect anyone’s opinion by association.
Can I still play on your blog?
November 11th, 2009 at 12:18 AM
Rick Larsen has outlived his shelf life. I am not in the least bit thankful to anyone who voted for this disgrace of a bill - it is not a bill about health care. It is a front for redistributing wealth and ruining the country.
November 11th, 2009 at 12:39 AM
Of course, WDVOT, you’re more than welcome. I do encourage people to consider posting under one name, and I believe you in the past have attacked others here for using pseudonyms. It seems hypocritical to me. It is, however, not a rule, just a pet peeve of mine, because posting under one name allows people to associate a personality with you and a track record of posting. That track record can either encourage or discourage a person to read your posts, most especially if you’re anonymous.
I digress.
To be clear, pretty much every single time someone posts here with more than one name I ask why or note it here, because though I don’t explicitly mandate one name, I think it’s unfair for people to try to bolster their cause by using more than one name, thus leaving the impression they have more support for their position than they otherwise might. And to be clear, I’m NOT accusing you of this, because you’ve only posted here on this topic under this one name.
Anyway … my thoughts on the topic.
November 11th, 2009 at 2:27 AM
We didn’t vote on this Says
You are right on with your comment. I put my name up here because I have ruffled the feathers of the local LD it seems and will continue to be honest with my views. I hope everyone does independently from the group.
If the legislative district is going to hand deliver a thank you for his so-called courageous vote I think I have the right to object since it was on behalf of an organization which I thought I was a member of and refers to the district where I live.
Make no mistake this was an endorsement the moment it went public and should have been put to a vote of the membership in my opinion.
It probably would have passed but not to give the members a chance to speak for or against this action is very unsettling.
I hope the membership understands that I would speak up for them just as passionately if I supported this action but certainly remember there are more in the LD who may just have a different view of why Congressman Larsen voted this way.
As well said in these comments by other serious posters
I commend the County for declining to comment at this time. Maybe they will take a vote to see if they would like to send the congressman a thank you for his vote on this Bill and send it to the herald after they get a consensus.
It is not a secret that I would like to see Congressman Larsen replaced in the next election cycle. I have been accused indirectly of being a “Larsen Hater”. I think this is an unfair tactic in order to spin me as just someone with a grudge against Rick Larsen. I have no personal malice to the congressman. I don’t know him well enough. I have been following his votes for years and watched how he has conducted himself in several venues. What I do know is that he is not a good congressman in my opinion and he should be replaced on the basis of his voting record on issues which are at the front of the list as far as importance to the public. He also has some character flaws that I find unacceptable in the person I want to represent my family in congress. I think the more who look into Rick Larsens record they will see what I am talking about. Many already have.
I wasn’t going to reply to this post but I figured I would since it is being shoved down our throats.
I also think the letter is very well written and credit who ever wrote it. I just wish I could support it.
November 11th, 2009 at 8:43 AM
Hi Rick!
I’m glad to see you’ve commented here.
My take on the letter to Mr. Larsen is that it’s sorta like positive reinforcement, or ‘reward training’.
They say you can’t teach an old dog new tricks, but I’d like to think differently.
November 11th, 2009 at 9:57 AM
Bull crap.
I didn’t post on this issue with two names thereby trying to get double clout.
AND the only time I’ve chided others who didn’t use their real names was when they were accusing others of being too cowardly to use theirs, then posting under an alias themselves.
Do your research, Sam.
I have always religiously posted under my own name in the Herald.
This time my very strong opinion could have involved others negatively, and I don’t have the right to do that.
November 11th, 2009 at 10:08 AM
FYI, orginally (BAFY!!) I did post under my real name, when I’s first did AFY!! he who sees all and knows all called me on it, as he does everyone, since that time I’s has always posted as AFY!! because it appears AFY!! brings so much immense pleasure to all me friends!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
November 11th, 2009 at 10:10 AM
We didn’t vote - perhaps you should re-read my post.
November 11th, 2009 at 10:21 AM
Good point Camile but I think it’s going to take someone else in that seat who doesn’t need so much training. Larsen has been a in congress for years. If he still needs training I think he’s un-trainable.
I agree with “We didn’t vote on this Says:
” The day before the actual vote, masses of us were calling his office and telling him he’d best look for another job. At literally the eleventh hour, he called everyone who is anyone in the Dem hierarchy and said, “I’m voting for the bill” like he’d achieved his own personal wisdom and was ready to play hero.”
This is a typical pattern by Larsen the only change is since he was censured this summer and got a bit of negative press he is just covering some loose ends to keep him in a certain constituencies good graces.
Nice to see you Camille!
November 11th, 2009 at 10:32 AM
Methinks ole Rick finally decided that the rewards he was seeking from one side weren’t as much as another side, in other words; maybe Rick couldn’t decide on which trough until he got a better feeling of it’s contents!
A true man of character, don’t you know!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
November 11th, 2009 at 10:37 AM
Sam-
You’re right–I didn’t read your post carefully enough.
BTW, I do use a pseudonym when I post to the Herald articles–there’s a mean bunch of people out there, as you may be aware. However, on your blog I feel a bit safer and use my own name.
Sorry for the sharp retort. It’s still true, however, that I don’t criticize others for using aliases unless they’ve just done that to someone else.
November 11th, 2009 at 11:07 AM
“This is a typical pattern by Larsen the only change is since he was censured this summer and got a bit of negative press he is just covering some loose ends to keep him in a certain constituencies good graces.”
(Rick LaFave)
I agree.
He didn’t get my vote last year.
I don’t recall voting for him in the previous election.
And I sure as heck won’t vote for him if he runs in the next one.
November 11th, 2009 at 11:50 AM
WDVOT,
Just for the records, I posted my name and telephone number on a thread the other day.
It didn’t generate any calls, by the way, but I l don’t think that anyone here would accuse me of hedging my opinions.
November 11th, 2009 at 12:01 PM
If you want phone calls, try Match.com.
Then you might get lucky and enlightened at the same time.
November 11th, 2009 at 12:45 PM
Some of us have convinced a great candidate to file against Rick. Enough is too much.
Now we have to overcome his Big Money that he has left from prior elections. Not to mention the money that will come to him when someone else announces a challenge.
November 11th, 2009 at 1:15 PM
Davesix,
I called that number and got a recording that said it was no longer in service.
November 11th, 2009 at 1:28 PM
It was a trick, now you’re on the list for free window and siding replacement.
November 11th, 2009 at 3:47 PM
Camille,
You looked me up in the phone book, didn’t you? The number I posted isn’t listed.
November 11th, 2009 at 7:44 PM
I have written Representative Larsen a few times about healthcare reform, and I too have been upset by his wishy washy stance on the public option.
I believe H. L. Mencken once said, “A politician is an animal which can sit on a fence and yet keep both ears to the ground.” I think that, in Larsen’s case, the quote fits.
I also think that I will be supporting his Democratic rival during the next campaign.
November 11th, 2009 at 8:11 PM
I haven’t bothered to write Representative Larsen about healthcare reform, because I wasted a whole bunch of time composing emails to him about Waxman Markey, wasted more time calling his office about it. He did not post a position on the legislation until the evening before the vote.
Constituent opinion matters not at all to Rick Larsen. He’s a party-follower who does not even demand value for his constituents in return for his corrupt vote.
His motivation for his votes for stimulus, Cap-and-trade, and healthcare reform is campaign contributions.
Nothing else.
That motivation is extremely strong.
He doesn’t give a rip about what you think, or about what is in your interest.
November 11th, 2009 at 8:15 PM
I realize the Rep. Larsen receives a lot of constituent communication, but he’s never replied directly to anything I’ve written, many of which were pretty long letters.
On Wasman-Markey, the only thing that I received was the mass email announcing that he’d voted for the bill, an announcement that claimed that Waxman-Markey is a “jobs” bill.
I’d have laughed, but I was busy puking.
November 11th, 2009 at 8:37 PM
Mr. Larsen has never responded to any of my emails.
November 11th, 2009 at 9:23 PM
So Camille, 389-2519.
November 11th, 2009 at 9:28 PM
I should mention that the reason I wrote him about Waxman-Markey is because, from a public-policy point of view, it is such a stupid and counter-productive bill, a bill that accomplishes non of it’s stated goals while imposing costs that even the White House admits will amount to $1700 per household per year.
It’s far more easily repealed than is any kind of “health care reform”.
I’m sick.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:08 PM
I wonder what all here have to say now that the Whatcom Dems have passed a resolution commending Larsen on his vote. Didn’t take long for them to change their tune.
November 20th, 2009 at 1:12 PM
Don’t do it Camille,
For the Love of God,
Don’t do it!
November 20th, 2009 at 1:17 PM
I didn’t know Camille was a GOD lover! Or is it Ciz that’s the GOD lover? Learn something every day!
Now don’t nobody go and get me wrong here, I’s loves GOD too!
AFY!!thesheepdog!!!
November 20th, 2009 at 1:56 PM
I know Dave O.
November 20th, 2009 at 3:02 PM
No offense, Davey, but I’d much rather have ciz’s number.
But if you really think talking will help number is (509) 299-3121.