The Fighting 29th

All about New York's 29th Congressional District

Most of Tom Reed's conference call this morning was taken up by a discussion of deficits, but Reed made his most pointed attack during a discussion of Massa's town hall meetings. Reed said that he thinks town hall meetings are positive, and he strongly supports them. However, he said that, as a single-payer supporter, Massa went into those meetings with his mind made up. He said this is "disingenuous, misleading and highly arrogant."

I believe the leadership we would demonstrate to everyone is, look, I'm here, I'm listening. I will truly listen to what you have to say, and then I will come to a decision, and my decision will be something that I believe in, because I believe in the people that are giving me the information to come to that decision. So I applaud the Congressman in the sense that he's holding the town hall meetings [...] I as a Congressman would do that. [...] I would just hope that they're not a sham and a dog-and-pony-show, like Congressman Massa['s].

On the deficit, Reed said he was concerned that "we are literally bankrupting the United States for our children and grandchildren." He detailed the deficit amounts, and said that the projection that, by the end of the next decade, the national debt will be 75% of the US economy "scares" him. "You can't survive with that debt obligation hanging over your head."

Reed said he was willing to "make hard decisions". Recotta asked him which services and jobs he would could first. Reed said he'd take a "hard look" at entitlement programs, stimulus, and industry bailouts. On entitlements, he said that government had "failed miserably" as trustees for Social Security. Reed felt that "a promise made is a promise kept" in Social Security, but that we have to make some "hard choices" with regards to his generation (Reed is in his late 30's) and later generations.

In response to a question about how to keep cuts from being passed on to states and cities, Reed said that he favored an analysis of the passed on costs in every bill. He did allow that there were some legitimate roles for deficit spending, such as wars, specifically the First and Second World Wars.

Last night's Massa town hall meeting in Farmington got big play in the Democrat and Chronicle and on 13-WHAM. Normally, any mention of Massa in Rochester media would be diluted by references to Lee, Slaughter and Maffei, but he's got center stage now because all of the other area Members of Congress aren't holding public meetings.

The Star-Gazette has a report on yesterday's Massa conference call.

I listened to the Massa press call today. Every reporter who asked a question was from the Southern Tier, except me. So, naturally, almost every topic discussed was directly related to the Southern Tier.

Bob Recotta from the Corning Leader asked a couple of questions about healthcare legislation. One was about co-ops, and Massa doesn't feel that he knows enough about the current Senate bill (which was just amended) to go into specifics, but he thinks that any co-op will need hundreds of thousands of participants to work. Massa also said that he wouldn't vote for the healthcare bill in hopes that it would be modified in conference. "I vote on what's written on a piece of paper."

Gary from WPIG radio ("Sizzlin' Country") in Olean, and Rick Miller from the Olean Times-Herald asked about disaster relief for that area. Other than another letter from Massa, Schumer and Higgins, there's nothing new to report. Rick asked if Massa thought the Obama administration was dragging its feet because of Massa's opposition to healthcare legislation. Massa said he'd be "stunned" if that was happening, and also noted that Schumer and Higgins have the same request as Massa.

In addition to a personal visit to Gowanda, where he found the athletic field "ankle deep in mud", Massa's also dispatched a staffer to talk to the superintendent there about the district needs.

Massa opened the call by noting that town hall meetings are his most visible activity, but he also tries to make in-district visits that are relevant to pending legislation. For example, HR 1132 continues some tax benefits for shortline railroads. Massa traveled on the Western New York and Pennsylvania Railroad with some local officials to better understand shortline railroads.

I asked Massa if he thought that there was less misinformation, such as questions about death panels, surfacing in his latest town halls. He said a "small minority" of constituents still ask about things like that, and refuse to believe him even after he reads from the bill.

Even so, "if I'm willing to the best of my ability to explain my position, most people are open to disagreeing with me in a civil [way] if they're going to disagree."

At today's Massa press conference, Eric Massa announced that tomorrow's town hall meeting, which was to occur outdoors in Perinton, has moved to Victor High School:

Wednesday, August 26th
5:30-7:30 PM
Victor High School Auditorium
953 High St.
Victor, NY 14564

Massa and Schumer are asking again for disaster money for CattCo.

Jill Wynn of the D&C editorial board has a post about Massa's town hall meetings. I thought this was an interesting way to put it:

I received this information below via e-mail Friday afternoon from the Organizing for America folks regarding town hall meeting to discuss healthcare reform in our area. These meetings will be held by Rep. Eric Massa.

Since Massa is the only federal office holder hosting open town hall meetings, I wonder how many Rochester-area voters will use his meetings as an opportunity to learn or protest, even if they don't live in the 29th.

I've heard a lot of noise about numbers in the healthcare debate. People are uncomfortable with the claim that we spend far more than any other country, and with the claim that the quality of our healthcare trails other countries. So, this weekend I went looking for reliable sources for those two claims.

First, spending, which is the easy one. An organization called the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has been compiling data on healthcare spending for years. Their latest report shows that the US spends significantly more than other developed countries, no matter how you slice it. The graph above uses 2006 OECD data, which is the latest full set available. As you can see, we spent about $7,000 per person on healthcare that year, far more than other developed countries.

One of the talking points I've heard is that per-capita numbers don't tell the whole story, because they don't count illegal immigrants. The graph above, based on the same OECD data, that shows spending as percentage of GDP. We still spend the most by a longshot using GDP as the benchmark. (Note that you can click on either graph to enlarge it.)

The second claim -- that the quality of our healthcare isn't as good as the rest of the world -- is harder to measure. The non-partisan Robert Wood Johnson foundation has sponsored a comprehensive analysis of the existing reports on healthcare quality. The full report is a dozen pages and cites a number of different studies. Here are some findings:

• The US is "one of several world leaders" in cancer care.
• US-Canada comparisons more often find that Canadian care is better overall.
• The US has more surgical and medical errors (known as "patient safety" issues) than other countries.

The report specifically debunks one talking point: that the higher US rate of homicide and violent death skews mortality statistics. The study authors looked at "amenable mortality", which adjusts for different accident rates, and found that the US still lags other countries.

Overall, the study found:

[W]hile evidence base is incomplete and suffers from other limitations, it does not provide support for the oft-repeated claim that the “U.S. health care is the best in the world.” In fact, there is no hard evidence that identifies particular areas in which U.S. health care quality is truly exceptional.

Reader Elmer sends today's Corning Leader Opinion Page [pdf], which contains Eric Massa's op-ed explaining his position on listening to constituents.

Editor Joe Dunning's column also discusses the healthcare issue, making the point that doing something is probably better than doing nothing.

Tom Reed's campaign site has now posted its "issues" page, which contains a short run-down of Reed's positions on eight issues of the day.

Since healthcare is driving our current discussion, it's interesting to take a closer look at Reed's statement. He begins with this:

The current proposal, HR 3200, has been changed a number of times and likely will change many more times. At this point, the debate is not about the specifics of HR 3200. It’s about private care vs. socialized medicine.

He goes on to point out that Massa is in favor of single-payer healthcare, and Reed isn't. Fair enough, though even Massa agrees that single-payer is off the table. Reed wants the debate to be about socialized medicine, but it isn't -- it's about the way that the market for private insurance should be structured, and whether that market should include a public option to ensure competition.

Reed ends with :

We should subject health insurance to competition in the free market. Instead of being forced into a particular plan by their employer, people should be able to choose. Choose their own plan that allows them to work with their doctors, not a government board, to determine what treatments are necessary and when.

Allowing patients to choose health plans in an open market will force health insurance companies, healthcare providers and pharmaceutical companies to compete by offering plans, services and products based on market needs and demand. Free market competition will inevitably drive costs down.

Am I missing something here? Hasn't the free market led to rescission and denial of coverage for pre-existing conditions? How will Reed address that? Though HR 3200 contains no "government board" to determine treatment, why is it better to have an insurance company board making decisions, as they do today?

Also, even though employees can't choose their insurance, employers who purchase insurance can probably strike a better bargain, because they have the bargaining power of purchasing a good in volume. Xerox gets a better price from GM for fleet trucks than I do because they're buying thousands rather than one, and the same is true of insurance.

It's good that Reed is engaging on healthcare instead of just saying "No", but we need more meat on this topic.

The Messenger-Post's Saturday editorial supports Massa's remarks at Netroots nation, saying:

Should Massa listen to his constituents on the subject of health care? Yes, and he has — most visibly through town hall meetings that have attracted hundreds at a time. Should he pander to popular opinion — or any opinion, for that matter — when it comes time to the vote? No.

In the end, Massa should be trusted to draw on his research on the health-care issue and make an informed decision. That’s what he, and other politicians, were elected for. And informed decisions sometimes run counter to public opinion.

The YouTube of Massa's remarks has provoked an avalanche of negative posts in out-of-district right-wing blogs. In the district, however, one of the most conservative papers (the Leader) and one of the most liberal (the Messenger-Post) have a completely different take.

The D&C has a long story about Rochester-area town hall meetings. The story concentrates on Massa's meetings, since Maffei, Lee and Slaughter are having nothingburger phone-in meetings.

Joe Spector has Massa's announcement that he's endorsing Kirsten Gillibrand for Senate. It looks like Gillibrand won't have any primary opposition, so her spot as the Democrat in the race is sealed.