Saturday, December 29, 2007
Is this front page news? Nope.
It's buried because it's not Muslims. (h/t Lambert at Corrente)
Read on.... "A rash of attacks on abortion and family planning clinics has struck Albuquerque this month, the first such violence there in nearly a decade.
Two attacks occurred early Tuesday at two buildings belonging to Planned Parenthood of New Mexico, according to Albuquerque police and fire officials. An arson fire damaged a surgery center the organization uses for abortions, and the windows of a Planned Parenthood family planning clinic 12 blocks away were smashed, the officials said."
On Wednesday, agents with the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, along with local arson investigators, arrested two suspects in the fire at Dr. Boyd’s clinic, which has provided abortions to women from throughout the region and Mexico since 1972.
The suspects, Chad Altman and Sergio Baca of Albuquerque, both 22, were arrested on arson charges after the authorities received a tip, said Jake Gonzales, the agent in charge of the firearms agency’s Albuquerque office."
"“I’m going to have to accept the fact that I’m going to die before the rights of women are secured, and the violence against providers and staff comes to an end,” Dr. Boyd said.
A study issued last year by the Feminist Majority Foundation, which monitors attacks on abortion clinics, concluded that the most serious anti-abortion violence had declined since 1994, when federal legislation gave greater protection to providers and patients. According to the report, 18 percent of clinics experienced severe violence in 2005, compared with 52 percent in 1994.
Still, the report said, many clinics are still targets of extreme violence."
This is clearly terrorism. Homegrown, "christian" terrorism.
Where is DHS in this?
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Two weeks ago the Long Island Press did a cover story about Long Island "Citizen Journalists" and featured Peter King Watch as one of the sites.
Last week, a letter appeared in the Press bashing the site and me...
"Zinging King Watch
I have to question your recent article on one of the “citizen journalists,” the gentleman who runs the blog King Watch [“Citizen Journalists: Long Island Blogs,” Oct. 4]. Journalism used to be something revered, but people like [the bloggers on] King Watch, along with those who covered the King/Mejias election for Newsday last year, showed their true colors-that they are interested in substantive issues but would rather make cheap political points by relentlessly attacking the congressman’s son and daughter for alleged ties to lobbyists. They even went to far as to allege both his children influenced his decisions without a shred of evidence. I am sorry, but this is not what my definition of journalism is and the last thing we should be doing is encouraging such behavior. Dissent is a part of political discourse and while it’s a fallacy to believe in the term “clean election,” the spew that came from King Watch was shameful and uncalled for. We all know that there are certain things that Mejias couldn’t say directly, so rather, he had his hatchet man at King Watch do it for him - that’s not journalism.
Michael Kaplan, Freeport"
I read that and chuckled.
Because Michael Kaplan is trying to pull a fast one.
Here is my letter in this weeks Long Island Press...
"This is in response to the letter about my website Peter King Watch featured in the Oct. 4th issue. Letter writer Michael Kaplan takes issue with my website alternately calling me a “gentleman” and a “hatchet man.” Here comes the inconvienent truth; far from being “relentless,” the posts on my site about Sean Kings lobbying ties consisted of four posts out of hundreds. My site deals with issues and facts that Kaplan and King cannot refute or rebut. I work for no one but myself and post what I feel needs to be known by voters. Simply put, the facts.
What is most disturbing is that Kaplan stands on his soapbox pontificating about what he believes is journalism and tries to make what he himself calls “cheap political points” without disclosing his own background. Michael Kaplan is the past president of the Nassau County Young Republicans, interned for Peter King and now works for King’s committee in Washington . He boasts of being called “Mike the Machine” by King on his MySpace page. If Kaplan wanted to be honest he would have included that information which would put his attack on me and King Watch in better perspective."
So we have the former president of the YR's and a current employee of King making like he's just a regular guy writing a letter to the editor.
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
In response, King pulls the Hillary-Hate card and says that if the religious right doesn't support Rudy, Hillary Clinton will be president.
The New York Observer has more...
"Peter King: Dobson Could Elect Hillary
Peter King thinks the religious right wing might end up guaranteeing a Hillary Clinton presidency.
"It would do more harm to the religious wing of the party," said King, a Giuliani supporter and Republican congressman from New York. "If they are successful it would mean they would be responsible for Hillary Clinton being president."
Ultimately, he doesn't think it's going to happen.
"They're not going to be successful," he said of Giuliani critics like James Dobson. "I think they are going to do very poorly."
But King also said he thought the prospect of President Hillary would be the very thing that would rally disparate parts of G.O.P. behind Giuliani.
"He is the one Republican that has the best chance of beating Hillary Clinton," said King. "Because having Hillary there makes the Republicans realize how serious this election is next year - that this is not just a theoretical debate. This is for real and he is the only one right now who can match her toe-to-toe as far as television ability or even the super-status that she has."
Monday, October 08, 2007
Thanks to the Long Island Press Editors and Staff for choosing this site.
What's the deal? Arguably the most high-profile individual politician-watchdog blog for LI, the Peter King Watch keeps tabs on the headline-prone, lone-Republican U.S. representative in the LI caucus. With no shortage of material, this blog has been recapping and editorializing on the congressman's often eyebrow-raising public statements since posts started in 2004.
Why should you care? The blog has commented on everything from King's rise and fall from chair of the Homeland Security Committee, to protests at his district office in Massapequa, to his skirmishes with the Muslim community (not to mention the angry letter-writing community). Latest entries go beyond King's controversial recent interview when he made his "there are too many mosques in America" comment. Posts also track the congressman's latest votes on important bills in the House. As a sign of the blog's success, there are even anti-King souvenirs for sale on the website. It's not all negative, though. In a show of concern, the blogger posted that he hoped those responsible for placing a pipe bomb outside King's district office would be arrested.
Quotable: "I thank God every night that George Bush is our president."-A King classic that the blogger seems to take joy in reminding readers about regularly"
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
King should stop bigotry
One cannot help but get an uncomfortable sense of deja vu reading the remarks of Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford) that there are "too many mosques in this country, there's too many people who are sympathetic to radical Islam" ["King: 'Too many mosques,'" News, Sept. 20].
Once again flying boldly in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, King seems unwilling or perhaps unable to abandon his crusade against his fellow Americans who happen to be of a faith other than his own.
It is both a political and a moral tragedy for all of us when a representative, charged not only with representing all the citizens of his district in Congress but with upholding and defending the Constitution and all the rights guaranteed therein, stoops to this kind of fear-mongering and bigotry.
Muslim Americans, like Christian and Jewish and every other kind of Americans, are equal under the law and as such are equally entitled to be free of harassment because of their faith. President George W. Bush has said more than once that the war on terror is not a war on Islam. Peter King should listen to him.
Rev. Mark J. Lukens
Editor's note: The writer is president of the Long Island chapter of The Interfaith Alliance and pastor of Bethany Congregational Church.
As an American, I hang my head in shame. And as a Jew with a deep sense of foreboding, I stand in solidarity with my Muslim fellow citizens to repudiate the conduct of Rep. Peter King and State Sen. Dean Skelos (R-Rockville Centre) for their prejudicial and inflammatory actions.
King's unsubstantiated claims and innuendoes are reminiscent of the defamatory tactics employed against my own faith community in Germany just before the Nazi takeover in 1933.
The same may be said of passing into law encouragement to subject to police scrutiny ordinary citizens who may be engaged in an unfamiliar ritual practice of their faith without potential consequences for defamation. It is a blatant incitement to community divisiveness and the harassment of those whose life of pious service to the divine differs from the more commonplace.
I call upon my fellow clergy of all denominations and all citizens of goodwill to denounce publicly both of these contributions to the intended discrimination that they foster toward loyal Americans.
Rabbi Paul Joseph
Monday, October 01, 2007
From the Daily Gotham...
"Have you been following the fight to reauthorize and expand the State-Child Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP)? Tuesday, a large majority of Congress members voted for a House-Senate compromise which will make lower cost health insurance available to millions of children who are, at present, without any. UPDATE: Thursday night, the Senate voted for S-CHIP 67-29; greater than two-thirds majority. Every GOP Senator in a tight bid for reelection in 2008 voted for S-CHIP and against Mr. Bush. President Bush, that deplorable politician, has promised a veto.
The problem progressives face is that, even with 45 GOP votes, we are 24 votes away from a veto over-riding two-thirds majority. Peter King and Vito Fossella, perhaps with a wish to avoid political extinction, voted for the bill (They’d voted against earlier versions in the House). Two NYS GOP Congress Members voted with Mr. Bush against Child Health: John "Randy" Kuhl & Thomas Renyolds. A Century Foundation poll shows voters want to spend more to insure more children and oppose a Bush veto."
"The (Staunton, Va.) News LeaderSept. 23, 2007
A few weeks ago, after former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales had announced he was resigning, we suggested that a good way to check the qualifications of any prospective candidates for Gonzales' post might be to require them to pass the same test prospective U.S. citizens take. After all, Gonzales seemed unaware of concepts like the rule of law and the Constitution, things every want-to-be American must know.
After listening to the ravings of Rep. Peter King, R-NY, we've got another suggestion: Make it a prerequisite that any individual seeking to be elected to or currently serving in Congress be familiar with at least the first 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution.That would be what we fondly refer to as the Bill of Rights. It's apparent King isn't even familiar with the First Amendment, at least not the part that guarantees freedom of religion.
In an interview with The Politico, a newspaper that covers - what else, politics - in Washington, D.C., King, who is the ranking Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee, said that there were "too many mosques" in America.
"Unfortunately, we have too many mosques in this country. There's too many people who are sympathetic to radical Islam. We should be looking at them more carefully. We should be finding out how we can infiltrate. We should be much more aggressive in law enforcement," King was quoted as saying.
Later, King tried to say he was quoted "out of context." Unedited video of the interview, however, shows that not to be the case.
Every time an elected official wanders off into this kind of intellectual terra incognito, we can't help but wonder two things:
- Did they even get a basic education, and
- Wouldn't we be better off if this person was in some other line of work?
There are not "too many mosques" in the U.S., any more than there are too many Baptist churches or Jewish temples.
Sadly, there are too many people like Peter King who do not understand that one of the reasons the U.S. has grown and flourished is its ability to open its arms to people of many faiths, many nations, and many colors."
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Politico has more...."UPDATE: On Wednesday, the congressman said: “The quote was taken entirely out of context by Politico. My position in this interview, as it has been for many years, is that too many mosques in this country do not cooperate with law enforcement. Unfortunately, Politico was incapable of making this distinction.”
UPDATE 2: After Congressman King said his comment was taken out of context, Politico posted a fuller video so readers can decide."
Monday, September 17, 2007
"How much longer will
Boehner answered "I think General Petraeus outlined it pretty clearly. We’re making success. We need to firm up those successes. We need to continue our effort here because, Wolf, long term, the investment that we’re making today will be a small price if we’re able to stop al Qaeda here, if we’re able to stabilize the Middle East, it’s not only going to be a small price for the near future, but think about the future for our kids and their kids"
Yes, the sacrifice of American servicemen and women is a "small price to pay" according to Kings travel-buddy.
Decorated Vietnam Veteran Sen. John Kerry on Huffington Post said "A single life is a large price to pay for any endeavor. Sometimes, in our national interest, we choose to pay that awful price, but we must always make sure that the policy is worthy of it.”
King needs to publically repudiate Boehner's disgusting comments.
Here is the video
Saturday, September 08, 2007
Duncan Hunter: 30%
Tom Tancredo: 20%
Mike Pence: 7%
Peter King: 5%
John Boehner: 5%
Jeff Flake: 4%
Marsha Blackburn: 4%
John Shadegg: 3%
James Sensenbrenner: 3%
Roy Blunt: 2%
Jeb Hensarling: 2%
Jack Kingston: 2%
Adam Putnam: 1%
Thaddeus McCotter: 1%
Eric Cantor: 1%
Patrick McHenry: 1%
Chris Cannon: 0%
Tom Cole: 0%
Walter Jones: 0%
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
"Passenger dispute delays American Airlines flight overnight
A conflict between passengers at Lindbergh Field Tuesday night caused the overnight delay of an American Airlines flight headed to Chicago.
Flight 590 was scheduled to depart at 11 p.m. for Chicago O'Hare International Airport but was rescheduled for Wednesday at 10:15 a.m. after some kind of dispute among customers started at the gate and continued onto the plane, said American Airlines spokesman Tim Wagner.
"While Wagner said it is the airlines policy not to disclose any information about their passengers, televised reports claimed that the incident involved a group of six to seven Iraqi Americans and another passenger who was apparently uncomfortable that the men were speaking in Arabic.
The jet left the gate at 11:14 p.m. but did not take off and instead returned at 11:26 p.m. after a traveler with a child elected to get off the plane, Wagner said."
Monday, August 27, 2007
Would King like to head Homeland Security?
Would he be considered by Bush?
Is a 500 day tenure be worth it to King because after the 2008 elections, King wouldn't be asked to stay on.
Friday, August 24, 2007
Monday, August 20, 2007
Monday, August 06, 2007
He ignored it.
The declassified breifing:
Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate bin Laden since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the US. Bin Laden implied in U.S. television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and "bring the fighting to America."
After U.S. missile strikes on his base in Afghanistan in 1998, bin Laden told followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington, according to a -- -- service.
An Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative told - - service at the same time that bin Laden was planning to exploit the operative's access to the U.S. to mount a terrorist strike.
The millennium plotting in Canada in 1999 may have been part of bin Laden's first serious attempt to implement a terrorist strike in the U.S.
Convicted plotter Ahmed Ressam has told the FBI that he conceived the idea to attack Los Angeles International Airport himself, but that in ---, Laden lieutenant Abu Zubaydah encouraged him and helped facilitate the operation. Ressam also said that in 1998 Abu Zubaydah was planning his own U.S. attack.
Ressam says bin Laden was aware of the Los Angeles operation. Although Bin Laden has not succeeded, his attacks against the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 demonstrate that he prepares operations years in advance and is not deterred by setbacks. Bin Laden associates surveyed our embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam as early as 1993, and some members of the Nairobi cell planning the bombings were arrested and deported in 1997.
Al Qaeda members -- including some who are U.S. citizens -- have resided in or traveled to the U.S. for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks.
Two al-Qaeda members found guilty in the conspiracy to bomb our embassies in East Africa were U.S. citizens, and a senior EIJ member lived in California in the mid-1990s.
A clandestine source said in 1998 that a bin Laden cell in New York was recruiting Muslim-American youth for attacks.
We have not been able to corroborate some of the more sensational threat reporting, such as that from a ---- service in 1998 saying that Bin Laden wanted to hijack a U.S. aircraft to gain the release of "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdel Rahman and other U.S.-held extremists.
Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.
The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full-field investigations throughout the U.S. that it considers bin Laden-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group or bin Laden supporters was in the U.S. planning attacks with explosives.
Thursday, August 02, 2007
You would think that "Geez, it's common sense to want soldiers to have some rest before they are redeployed to a combat area."
But for Peter King and 189 other republicans voted against HR3159 Ensuring Military Readiness Through Stability and Predictability Deployment Policy Act of 2007.
It has become too common for soldiers returning to have very little time to rest before be redeployed - sometimes for a 3rd and 4th time - back to a combat area. It is time the soldiers who put their lives on the line every day get to spend time with their families and in too many cases get to know their newborn children or new spouses.
For King to vote against this bill just shows how little he thinks of the men and women who serve this country.
Here is the common sense idea from the bill:
"IN GENERAL- No unit of the Armed Forces specified in paragraph (3) may be deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom unless the period between the most recent previous deployment of the unit and a subsequent deployment of the unit is equal to or longer than the period of such most recent previous deployment."
Exemptions- The limitations in subsections (a) and (b) do not apply--
- (1) to special operations forces as identified pursuant to section 167(i) of title 10, United States Code; and
- (2) to units of the Armed Forces needed, as determined by the Secretary of Defense, to assist in the redeployment of members of the Armed Forces from Iraq to another operational requirement or back to their home stations.
- (d) Waiver by the President- The President may waive the limitation in subsection (a) or (b) with respect to the deployment of a unit of the Armed Forces to meet a threat to the national security interests of the United States if the President certifies to Congress within 30 days that the deployment of the unit is necessary for such purposes."
- (1) DEPLOYMENT- The term `deployment' or `deployed' means the relocation of forces and materiel to desired areas of operations and encompasses all activities from origin or home station through destination, including staging, holding, and movement in and through the United States and all theaters of operation.
- (2) UNIT- The term `unit' means a unit that is deployable and is commanded by a commissioned officer of the Army, Navy, Air Force, or Marine Corps serving in the grade of major or, in the case of the Navy, lieutenant commander, or a higher grade.
- (g) Effective Date- This Act shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act."
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
HR 3162 To amend titles XVIII, XIX, and XXI of the Social Security Act to extend and improve the children's health insurance program, to improve beneficiary protections under the Medicare, Medicaid, and the CHIP program, and for other purposes is pretty straight forward with its intent on providing health care.
What does Peter King have against children getting treated by a doctor?
The stated purpose of the bill is to "... provide dependable and stable funding for children's health insurance under titles XXI and XIX of the Social Security Act in order to enroll all six million uninsured children who are eligible, but not enrolled, for coverage today through such titles."
I guess with his own congressional, taxpayer-funded healthcare, King doesn't care about uninsured children.
And that is just plain wrong.
Call Peter King and tell him he needs to start caring about those less fortunate than he.
Washington Office # 202-225-7896
District Office # 516-541-4225
e-mail - firstname.lastname@example.org
Campaign office # (516) 280-5122
fax (516) 750-5121
King has gotten behind the effort to regulate the sale of ammonium nitrate which can be used as a main component of a improvised bomb. Timothy McVeigh used ammonium nitrate to blow up the Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City. President Clinton made a push to regulate the sale of ammonium nitrate but got resistance from the republican-led congress.
The opposition to the regulation have no leg to stand on and now some wacko may be making threats.
Monday, July 30, 2007
King tells Newsday "he stopped conducting the competition several years ago because of lack of interest."
Go to the Newsday article and read about the fantastic entries from the other districts. Is king saying from Oyster Bay to Babylon and Massapequa to Long Beach there are no young people interested in the arts?
How about Art in the Park in Massapequa Park?
Maybe look to the Town of Oyster Bay Arts Council for entries?
Or any of the schools located in the district?
How about trying next year because the 3rd district is full of very talented people?
Monday, July 23, 2007
Wednesday, July 04, 2007
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Here's her take on Peter King and his ilk "Also making the pitch for an unfettered president, free to eavesdrop on whomever he wants, whenever he wants, was Rep. Peter King, ranking Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee. Appearing on CNN's Late Edition, King said that the failed British attacks show that the best way to fight "the war on terrorism" is "to not allow people to cut into electronic surveillance, to stop that, to not be tying the hands of the president, neither here or in foreign policy."
The thinking of people like Lieberman and King (to say nothing of Bush and Cheney), when it comes to terrorism is as illogical as it is entrenched. It goes something like this: When someone attacks -- or tries to attack -- us or one of our allies because we are a free society, we should respond by making ourselves less free. That'll show the bastards!
This is not in any way to suggest that we shouldn't take terrorist threats seriously -- or that there aren't a lot of very dangerous people intent on carrying out attacks against us or our allies. But surely the answer isn't allowing Bush and Cheney to shred the Constitution -- and to continue making the spurious connection between Iraq and the war on terror. As Gordon Brown told the BBC on Sunday, "We are in the business of dealing with a long-term threat, a sustained threat that is unrelated in detail to one specific point of conflict in the world."
Monday, July 02, 2007
Now its Guiliani's turn to change his tune (h/t Town Crier)
Last month Rudy said...
"Islamic terrorists killed more than 500 Americans before Sept. 11. Many people think the first attack on America was on Sept. 11, 2001. It was not. It was in 1993," said the former New York mayor.
Giuliani argued that Clinton treated the World Trade Center bombing as a criminal act instead of a terrorist attack, calling it "a big mistake" that emboldened other strikes on the Khobar Towers housing complex in Saudi Arabia, in Kenya and Tanzania and later on the USS Cole while docked in Yemen in 2000.
"The United States government, then President Clinton, did not respond," Giuliani said. "(Osama) bin Laden declared war on us. We didn't hear it."
But back in 2006, Rudy said....
"The idea of trying to cast blame on President Clinton is just wrong for many, many reasons, not the least of which is I don't think he deserves it," Giuliani said during a stop in Florida. "I don't think President Bush deserves it. The people who deserve blame for Sept. 11, I think we should remind ourselves, are the terrorists - the Islamic fanatics - who came here and killed us and want to come here again and do it."Rudy needs to fire up the republican base so he attacks Clinton. Show you what kind of "man" he is.
"King, the GOP congressman, introduced him backstage to a soldier injured in one eye. Bush teared up and asked the young man to take off his dark glasses so he could see the wound, King recalled. "Human instinct is when someone has a serious injury to look the other way," King said. "He actually asked him to take them off. He actually touched the eye a little. It was almost as if he felt he had to confront it.""
Who asks to see a wound and then wants to touch it?
Maybe a curious child?
Looking the other way is one extreme and wanting to touch a wound is another extreme.
20 years ago, I injured my eye and had to wear an eye patch for 4 months. I don't believe anyone asked other than my doctor asked to see the eye. Much less touch it.
I had a "Out of Order" sign on the patch and even that casual attitude towards my injury didn't encourage anyone to ask me to take that patch off.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Sunday, June 03, 2007
Yes Peter, keep using 9/11 for Rudy. Keep using it because the more you highlight it, the worse its gonna be for Guiliani.
From the lack of upgraded radios for the FDNY to insisting on the Office of Emergency Management Command Center be located high in the sky at the Trade enter site, Rudy has a poor 9/11 record.
9/11 groups are getting ready to beat the crap out of Rudy. This is from Jim Riches, a deputy chief with the FDNY who lost his son on 9/11... “We have all the UFA, the UFOA, and the fire members are all behind us -- the International Association of Fire Fighters.... And we’re going to be out there today to let everybody know that he’s not the hero that he says he is.”
“If somebody can tell me what he did on 9/11 that was so good, I’d love to hear it. All he did was give information on the TV”
“He did nothing... He stood there with a TV reporter and told everyone what was going on. And he got it from everybody else down at the site.”
Not that I'm a fan of Thomspon but he does have a resume beyond his acting...
- Assistant US Attorney from 1969 to 1972
- Co-chief counsel to the Senate Watergate Committee
- US Senator
King is just doing what he always does, opens his mouth just to hear himself speak.
From the NY Daily News:
"Appearing tomorrow afternoon at the North-Shore LIJ Cancer Center, the liberal-leaning actress will give a keynote lecture about her 2000 diagnosis with uterine cancer and her successful struggle against the disease.
But her appearance in front of a positive audience on Long Island fueled speculation she might also announce a run against Republican Rep. Peter King.
"If she's going in 2008 and she's going after King's seat, you do it at an event in King's district," said Baruch College Prof. Doug Muzzio, a political expert. "You declare war on enemy turf."
Drescher denied the possibility of such an announcement, even if she has thought about having a career in Washington down the line.
"If I had my druthers, I'd rather be a senator" than a representative, she said. "But that doesn't mean that's necessarily where I'd start."
Monday, May 28, 2007
Rep. Steve Isreal says "What's going on is the Bush administration has a reckless disregard for the homeland security needs of New York... The president did not ask for a single penny for homeland security ... it was the Democrats who sent him a bill that had adequate levels for homeland security. He vetoed our bill. And he has threatened to veto the bill a second time."
NYS Deputy Secretary for Public Security Mike Balboni says "These reductions add up to a billion dollars of missed opportunities to invest in a variety of crucial security programs... Continued support is essential in order to encourage states and localities to believe in a partnership with Washington and make their own investments in homeland security."
"Israel said the compromise still boosts homeland security funding. "Would I have preferred more than that?" he said. "Yes. But the administration said they'd veto it and we'd end up with zero."
Peter King... "said he expected Congress to allocate more security funds as part of its regular budget process."
And the check is in the mail.
Why doesn't Bush want more Homeland Security funds and why does King stick up for Bush?
Sorry but Bush resigned as Commander in Chief of the military when he got himself a "War Czar."
Bush is no longer Commander in Chief. He gave that job up.
Even right-wing nut-job Michelle Malkin finds a "War Czar" odd.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
The story of Corrigan running was picked up by Newsday and then the Massapequa Post He was mentioned on The Politicker and he even started a thread over at Urban Elephants.
Corrigan started the 'Long Island Party' and according to his website began polling and reaching out in the district.
And now.... Nothing.
Corrigans blog content about his run is all gone and the 'Long Island Party' blog is now empty.
His name was on Race Tracker 2008 and that is gone too.
No announcement or reason for dropping out so completely was given.
The last post we saw was Corrigan saying he likes King and voted for King and agrees with King on issues. That didn't sound like an opponent.
Friday, May 18, 2007
Monday, May 14, 2007
Even Newsday's conservative columnist Raymond Keating gets the picture:Some of the nation's most virulent anti-immigrant proposals have erupted from Long Island's elected officials, from Suffolk County Executive Steve Levy to local Congressional Representative Peter King, co-sponsor of the harsh and unworkable immigration bill H.R. 4437...The report, which is not yet available online, finds that Long Island Hispanics contribute nearly a billion dollars a year in taxes and other revenues to local government, far more than they use in public services, producing a net benefit to the public of $202 million a year. Consumer spending by Hispanics produced an additional $5.7 billion impact on the Long Island economy, creating more than 52,000 jobs.
Meanwhile, our congressional representatives should be pushing for comprehensive immigration reform. Yes, tighten up the borders for national security purposes, but also expand legal avenues for immigration to keep our economy chugging along. It's clear that immigrants are not an economic burden, but instead a blessing."
Keating points out "So the importance of Latinos to the local economy has expanded. Torras and Skinner found that employment among Latinos on Long Island grew by one-third from 2000 to 2004. And between 1997 and 2002 the number of Latino-owned businesses on Long Island jumped by 35 percent, with growth in Suffolk County particularly strong at 51 percent. To sum up, the authors estimated that the Latino population in Nassau and Suffolk had a total economic impact of $5.7 billion in 2004, including helping to create more than 52,000 jobs. The economic pie grew.
But what about the burdens immigrants place on local government services? Torras and Skinner estimated that Latinos directly or indirectly generated $925 million in revenue for local governments in 2004, while costing Long Island localities $723 million. That comes out to a net positive contribution to local government of $614 per Latino resident."
Elana from DMI has more at Albany Project.
Friday, May 11, 2007
Now if this were May 2006, I could see Kings ramblings being prescient but this is 7 months after an election that put King into the MINORITY in congress.
Democrats won both houses of congress and Bush has a lower approval rating than Jimmy Carter on his worst day.
The republicans already have a heck of alot of problems. King can't see that?
Is he that detached from reality?
I'd also like to know how King believes that this Bush-Iraq War can "turn around."
Will all the warring factions give a big group hug and declare bygones?
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Thursday, May 03, 2007
Peter King decided it was best he vote against it.
What a sad little man.
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
Back in 1999, Bush had a different idea... (h/t Think Progess)
“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the president to explain to us what the exit strategy is.”
George W. Bush, 4/9/99, Houston Chronicle
“I think it’s also important for the president to lay out a timetable as to how long they will be involved and when they will be withdrawn.”
George W. Bush, 6/5/99, Scripps Howard/Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
QUESTION: On Agreeing to the Conference Report
BILL TITLE: Making emergency supplemental appropriations for fiscal year ending September 30, 2007, and for other purposes
Why doesn't King want to provide funds for our soldiers?
HR 1591 .S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Health, and Iraq Accountability Act, 2007 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)
Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Last year's election saw the emergence of local blogs that targeted specific members of Congress or promoted favored candidates -- sites like Dump Mike Ferguson that lobbed attack after attack against the Republican incumbent of that name in New Jersey, or like LamontBlog in Connecticut that touted Democrat Ned Lamont in his intraparty bid to unseat Sen. Joseph Lieberman.
Such blogs were relatively rare last year, but there already are signs that they will be far more common in 2008. The latest evidence is a Newsday article focused on "the blog war in New York" alone.
For now, Democrats, who always seem to be five online steps ahead of Republicans, are on the offensive. The piece noted blogs that target GOP Reps. Peter King (Peter King Watch) and Vito Fossella (Veto Vito). There also are blogs aimed at Nassau Legislature Minority Leader Peter Schmitt (Peter Schmitt Watch), also a Republican, and the Nassau GOP (Nassau GOP Watch).
The advantage has local Republican worried. "Readers should consider proper defenses," Scott Scala told his audience at the New York GOP-oriented blog Urban Elephants. "Pro-candidate blogs? Anti-Dem elected officials blogs? Counter posts? Etc. We cannot lose the blog war in New York."
Posted by Danny | 12:11 PM
Monday, April 23, 2007
The Cook Report defines its findings this way..
"2008 POTENTIALLY COMPETITIVE HOUSE RACE CHART
This chart separates incumbents into categories by their Cook Political Report PVI rating.
PVI: The Partisan Voting Index (PVI) is a measurement of how each district performs compared to the nation as a whole. The PVI listed here reflects the results of 2000 and 2004. A PVI score of D+2, for example, means that in the 2000 and 2004 Presidential election, the district per formed an average of two percentage points more Democratic than the nation as a whole, while an R+3 score means that the district per formed three points more Republican than did the nation."
See the report here (opens as .pdf)
Here's the story from Newsday...
LI's Partisan Blogosphere
Say it five times fast. Partisan bloggers are blogging on the bloggings of other bloggers — and Long Island is the battlefield.
“Urban Elephants” is a New York City Republican-oriented Web site. A recent post expresses concern about “energetic liberal bloggers setting up space on line targeting specific Republican elected leaders,” that is, “blogs dedicated solely to one person.”
As examples, Elephants’ Scott Scala cites Democrat-oriented sites that target Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford), Nassau Legislature Minority Leader Peter Schmitt (R-Massapequa), the Nassau GOP — all of a piece. Another such site, called “Veto Vito,” whacks Staten Island Rep. Vito Fossella, the five boroughs’ only Republican Congressman.
“Now this does not necessarily mean such easily-set up sites can make an impact,” Scala writes, but “the larger media loves fights... A one-person crusade against one politician has the potential to become Cindy Sheehan-ized in the wrong hands.”
“Readers should consider proper defenses,” he adds. “Pro-candidate blogs? Anti-Dem elected officials blogs? Counter posts? Etc. We cannot lose the blog war in New York.”
At his “Peter Schmitt Watch,” John Rennhack of North Massapequa blogged: “I guess this post from Urban Elephants is flattering...Urban Elephants is well-written (not that we agree with the writing) and thoughtful.” Rennhack also does “Nassau GOP Watch” and “Peter King Watch.”
One-time candidate Rennhack even responded last year to a “Watch” site targeting King’s challenger, Legis. David Mejias, by creating “Mejias Watch Watch.”
Recent fare on the “Nassau GOP Watch” included a link to the New York Observer “Politicker” site video of GOP state and county leader Joseph Mondello saying of Gov. Eliot Spitzer: “He will self-destruct. You give it a little bit of time.” “GOP Watch” snaps: “So the plan is to wait patiently for Governor Spitzer to `self-destruct,’...Brilliant strategist.”
One recent “Urban Elephants” link, meanwhile, raps Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-Mineola) as having been unable in an interview to define a key term in her own anti-gun bill.
UPDATE: Also part of the scene we're describing is another pro-Democrat site, Nasty Letters, which also whacks King...
Sunday, April 22, 2007
H.R.1905: To provide for the treatment of the District of Columbia as a Congressional district for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives, and for other purposes will finally give the District of Columbia a vote in the House.
"SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AS CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT.
- (a) In General- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the District of Columbia shall be considered a Congressional district for purposes of representation in the House of Representatives.
- (b) Conforming Amendments Relating to Apportionment of Members of House of Representatives-
- (1) INCLUSION OF SINGLE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MEMBER IN REAPPORTIONMENT OF MEMBERS AMONG STATES- Section 22 of the Act entitled `An Act to provide for the fifteenth and subsequent decennial censuses and to provide for apportionment of Representatives in Congress', approved June 28, 1929 (2 U.S.C. 2a), is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
- `(d) This section shall apply with respect to the District of Columbia in the same manner as this section applies to a State, except that the District of Columbia may not receive more than one Member under any reapportionment of Members.'.
- (2) CLARIFICATION OF DETERMINATION OF NUMBER OF PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS ON BASIS OF 23RD AMENDMENT- Section 3 of title 3, United States Code, is amended by striking `come into office;' and inserting the following: `come into office (subject to the twenty-third article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States in the case of the District of Columbia);'.
"In the crucial test of political fund-raising, Peter King flunked out this quarter. He reports a low $99,005 in receipts, with $115,700 spent, for a grand ANEMIC total of -$16,695. That's right, he LOST MONEY this quarter!
Granted, some of the expenses doubtless relate to tying up the '06 Campaign. But still, for a newly competitive district, King did not raise impressive numbers this quarter. Perhaps most significantly, he currently has only $287,090 Cash on Hand. At this point in the last election cycle, King was showing $776,990. In other words, he's down $489,900 from this time two years ago, or nearly $500 K.
From a progressive standpoint a strong challenge to King, such as a Dave Mejias rematch, can go head to head on fund raising. King's '06 victory, despite being down in numerous polls, can at least partially be attributed to his 2 to 1 spending advantage; he spent over $2.1 Million in the '06 Cycle. This time around, unless he ups his game hardcore, he won't be so lucky."
Third Party candidate to run against Congressman King
by Tiffany Elliott
Pete King Third Congressional District residents would vote for a new third party candidate if they are convinced the candidate would listen to them and vote on the basis of what the majority wants, according to North Massapequa resident Bill Corrigan who just announced his run for the seat currently held by Congressman Peter King (R-Massapequa).
"We found that 74.9 percent of our survey takers are staying away from the polls come election day because they believe they have too little of a choice. It's like the lesser of two evils," said 36-year old Corrigan, an independent candidate who said he would most likely run under the "Long Island" or "Islander " party banner.
According to the political newcomer, 8,000 registered voters responded last month to his online website "Democracy Direct" and completed the survey."
"I believe I would be a good candidate for the seat because I would have the humility to say 'this is what the people want' and I'd be able to listen even if I don't agree," he said.
"After 15 years in his seat, King has become ineffectual," added the candidate, who works on Wall Street."
Reached in Washington, King said: "I am running hard for reelection, no matter who my opponent is. I encourage people to get involved in the political process."
Monday, April 02, 2007
Peter King thanks god every night that Bush is president.
It seems a growing number of Bush true-believers and inner-circle-types are jumping ship and telling what is really going on.
And it ain't pretty.
Vic Gold a long-time Bush family friend has a book coming out 'Invasion of the Party Snatchers: How the Holy-Rollers and the Neo-Cons Destroyed the GOP' and he tells the Washington Post (h/t Crooks and Liars) "For all the Rove-built facade of his being a 'strong' chief executive, George W. Bush has been, by comparison to even hapless Jimmy Carter, the weakest, most out of touch president in modern times," Gold writes. "Think Dan Quayle in cowboy boots."
Gold is even more withering in his observations of Cheney. "A vice president in control is bad enough. Worse yet is a vice president out of control."
For Gold, Cheney brings to mind the adage of Swiss writer Madame de Stael, who wrote, "Men do not change, they unmask themselves." Cheney has a deep streak of paranoia and megalomania, Gold suggests — but he says he did not see it at first.
He was hiding who he really was," Gold says. "He was waiting for an opportunity."
Another Bush insider Matthew Dowd is going public too. From the NYTimes “I’m a big believer that in part what we’re called to do — to me, by God; other people call it karma — is to restore balance when things didn’t turn out the way they should have,” Mr. Dowd said. “Just being quiet is not an option when I was so publicly advocating an election.”
"He said he thought Mr. Bush handled the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks well but “missed a real opportunity to call the country to a shared sense of sacrifice.”
He was dumbfounded when Mr. Bush did not fire Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld after revelations that American soldiers had tortured prisoners at Abu Ghraib."
"He said he clung to the hope that Mr. Bush would get back to his Texas style of governing if he won. But he saw no change after the 2004 victory.
He describes as further cause for doubt two events in the summer of 2005: the administration’s handling of Hurricane Katrina and the president’s refusal, around the same time that he was entertaining the bicyclist Lance Armstrong at his Crawford ranch, to meet with the war protester Cindy Sheehan, whose son died in Iraq.
“I had finally come to the conclusion that maybe all these things along do add up,” he said. “That it’s not the same, it’s not the person I thought.”
"In a wide-ranging interview here, Mr. Dowd called for a withdrawal from Iraq and expressed his disappointment in Mr. Bush’s leadership.
He criticized the president as failing to call the nation to a shared sense of sacrifice at a time of war, failing to reach across the political divide to build consensus and ignoring the will of the people on Iraq. He said he believed the president had not moved aggressively enough to hold anyone accountable for the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, and that Mr. Bush still approached governing with a “my way or the highway” mentality reinforced by a shrinking circle of trusted aides.
“I really like him, which is probably why I’m so disappointed in things,” he said. He added, “I think he’s become more, in my view, secluded and bubbled in.”
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Turns out King falls on his face with this one too.
King tells AP "Rudy is a tough guy. Nobody has ever said he was Mr. Congeniality. It's not always pretty to look at, but he got the job done,"
He got the job done?
What job would that be?
The education system in NYC was a mess under Guiliani and he left it a mess when he left office.
The NYC Office of Emergency Management was built under his direction at 7 WTC over many objections. Guess what happend on 9/11? The one place that could coordinate city services was knocked out. Guiliani was told 7 WTC was the wrong place and the command center should be built far away from any potential targets but he fought for it and got it.
How about the FDNY getting better communication equiptment? That didn't happen even though the FDNY was saying they needed it.
Is that "getting the job done?"
Let's look at something even more recent. Guiliani and his company Guiliani Partners were hired with much fanfare by Mexico City to help lower the crime rate. Guess what? I'll let the NY Sun tell you the rest.
"When this crime-ridden capital city announced it was bringing in Mayor Giuliani and his private consulting firm to advise its police, it was big news not only in New York and Mexico but all over the world. "Giuliani to the rescue" was the headline in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Followed by legions of cameras, Mr. Giuliani spent a day-and-a-half in January 2003 touring Mexico City's danger and tourist zones, protected by a motorcade of a dozen bulletproof sport utility vehicles, 400 officers, and a helicopter. "He was mobbed and cheered and was a tremendous hero," Michael Hess, a top Giuliani aide, told The New York Sun.
Two years later, the cheering has stopped. In January 2005, Mexico City's new police chief, Joel Ortega, told local reporters, "I am no fan of Giuliani." Far from the 67% drop in homicides achieved during Mr. Giuliani's mayoralty in New York, which was touted in a Giuliani Partners press release announcing its Mexico City contract, the homicide rate in Mexico's capital slipped less than 1% in 2004. Kidnappings in which the victim is driven from ATM to ATM to withdraw money are on the rise, with some security firms saying Mexico is now rivaling Colombia as kidnapping capital of the world."
"They were not prepared, not at all," said another former Mexico City police official who worked closely with the Giuliani team, Antonio Rendon. "They weren't consultants, they were retired policemen. And they were trying to organize another police force, but not with a methodology or a clear idea."
"The Giuliani plan did not have any effect. It was money in the trash, really," said a police officer patrolling the central square here earlier this month, Nicocio Acosto Leon. "Better to buy arms, uniforms, to fix our vehicles because we have to do that ourselves."
Another uniformed officer on patrol, Gabriel Milan, was skeptical that Mr. Giuliani's efforts had achieved any results. "They say crime has gone down 10% but it's a lie. It's gone up. Daily kidnappings, rapes, car robberies." He said the bulletproof vest he was wearing was so old that it was no longer effective."
Subject: An Open Letter to Democratic Party Members
Author: Bill Corrigan for Congress
Date: 3/26/2007 3:59 pm EDT
My fellow Democratic constituents of the third district,
I am writing to you today to ask you to consider voting for me on Election Day 2008. I am running to represent New York's Third District in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Since 1992, in seven different elections, you have casted over 600,000 for your candidates. Over 600,000 pulls of the level. Over 600,000 voices gone unheard. Each time beaten by a powerful incumbent in a heavily Republican district.
So I ask you, in 2008, don't throw your vote away yet again.
A vote for Bill Corrigan is a vote for YOU, each and every time a bill reaches the house floor YOU will get to vote YOUR way, again and again and again.
And I guarantee this...your voice will be heard, each and every time.
Bill Corrigan for Congress
Here is King on Seniors...
PROTECTING AMERICA’S SENIOR CITIZENS
Congressman King is a strong supporter of preserving Social Security and providing expanded prescription drug coverage for senior citizens.
King voted for a presciption drug bill that has created more problems for seniors.
King had the chance to vote to close the coverage gap the drug bill created but he voted against it.
King once again had an opportunity to stand up for his constituents but voted with his pharmacutical company contributors.
The bill 'H. R. 4: To amend part D of title XVIII of the Social Security Act to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to negotiate lower covered part D drug prices on behalf of Medicare beneficiaries.' pretty much explains itself in the title.The point is to work out a price plan with pharmacutical companies to help people especially seniors afford thier medication. Or as the bill puts it "(1) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary shall negotiate with pharmaceutical manufacturers the prices (including discounts, rebates, and other price concessions) that may be charged to PDP sponsors and MA organizations for covered part D drugs for part D eligible individuals who are enrolled under a prescription drug plan or under an MA-PD plan."
Right now there is a huge hole in the Part D coverage that gives many beneficiaries the choice of vital medication or food. Not both.
Peter King voted "NO" on this bill.
Here is some background via CBS News on the current problems with Part D coverage that King wants to keep intact.
"For all patients, Medicare covers 75 percent of the first $2,250 worth of drugs. But after that, coverage drops to zero — and doesn't resume until the patient hits $5,100 in expenses. Then Medicare kicks in again, paying 95 percent of costs. But it's this gap — of almost $3,000 — that many sick and disabled seniors call unaffordable."
For Paul Jutras, who takes 14 medicines every day, the Medicare drug benefit seemed to stop as soon as it began. "Asticol was $253.30," he says. "They paid nothing. And I paid 253.30." The problem is that he's fallen into a gap in coverage called the "doughnut hole" — in which seniors pay for all of their drugs themselves. On Jutras' low income, and with this many prescriptions, he's trying to decide which drug not to take. "I've had congestive heart failure," he says, "so giving up one of those prescriptions can really be fatal for me."
Why doesn't King care about people like Paul Jutras?