Overdue

So it finally happened. The Senate finally passed it. And the suspense should be over by now.

Of course, we're talking about the Medicare "Doc Fix". Because Congress hasn't been able to agree to permanently fix a glitch in the Medicare reimbursement law that was first passed in 1997, it's gone through this bizarre ritual of passing temporary "Doc Fix" bills to ensure doctors' compensation for treating Medicare patients doesn't plummet. But unlike previous times, this latest "Doc Fix" became the newest victim of...

You guessed it, the G-O-TEA's latest & greatest manufactured crisis! And surprise, surprise, Congressional Republican "leaders" tried to hold the Medicare "Doc Fix" hostage and demand ransom in the form of Obamacare repeal. Queue the eye rolls and guffaws.

As usual, G-O-TEA Senators attempted to cover their tracks by sharing "Obamacare HORROR STORIES!!!" Clearly, that blew up in their faces. And now that the Obamacare exchange is on track to meet its goals for the first quarter of 2014, enough Republican Senators agreed to let it go so Congress can finally pass a "Doc Fix" for this year.

To his credit, Dean Heller was one of the Republican Senators to break the logjam on the "Doc Fix". Also to his credit, Senator Heller has been one of the Republican Senators working on breaking the logjam on extending federal unemployment insurance (UI). Over 26,000 Nevadans & 2,000,000 other Americans have been left in a dangerous state of financial limbo for over 3 months. And these 2,000,000+ Americans have been left to suffer because of "TEA" tinged political games.

But now, the Senate finally looks set to pass a long overdue federal UI extension. Both Senator Heller & Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) support the bill, and it's expected to win at least 60 Senate votes this week. Yet even as the Senate inches closer to final passage, no one knows yet if UI extension will even have a House floor vote.

Even when House Speaker John Boehner (R) flew into town for a high dollar Wynn fundraiser last week, he refused to take any questions on UI (or anything else, for that matter). And even when Speaker Boehner has spoken up, only to say he wants to see more job creation, he's still standing in the way of legislation that can help create at least 200,000 jobs. And now that the Senate is on track to pass UI extension, neither Boehner nor his local lackey, Rep. Joe Heck (R-____), has uttered a peep about how they will respond in the House... If at all.

Why is this? Deep down, they and other House Republicans know that federal UI extension is just as overdue as the Medicare "Doc Fix". They must also realize that federal UI extension is just as overdue as that long ago promised "Republican alternative to Obamacare". Yet even as House Republicans look set to swallow the latest "Doc Fix", and even as they attempt to spin away the latest Obamacare news, they remain silent as over 2,000,000 Americans suffer.

UI extension is long overdue. Several Republican Senators know it. A host of economists know it. And far too many American families know it all too well. What will it take for House Republicans to accept this reality and end this unnecessary hardship?

What's Really Behind RyanCare 3.0

He's back! In case you were missing Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Mittpocalypse Now) and his Medicare busting ways, you can miss him no more. He's released yet another House G-O-TEA budget plan this year. And yes, it's yet another attempt to kill Medicare by turning it into an unworkable voucher system (while stripping away the promise of guaranteed care).

And that's not all. There's even more to Ryan's "new old budget plan". Just don't expect any real solutions to any real problems. Ezra Klein explained earlier Ryan's true purpose in proposing this budget.

Here is Paul Ryan’s path to a balanced budget in three sentences: He cuts deep into spending on health care for the poor and some combination of education, infrastructure, research, public-safety, and low-income programs. The Affordable Care Act’s Medicare cuts remain, but the military is spared, as is Social Security. There’s a vague individual tax reform plan that leaves only two tax brackets —10 percent and 25 percent —and will require either huge, deficit-busting tax cuts or increasing taxes on poor and middle-class households, as well as a vague corporate tax reform plan that lowers the rate from 35 percent to 25 percent.

But the real point of Ryan’s budget is its ambitious reforms, not its savings. It turns Medicare into a voucher program, turns Medicaid, food stamps, and a host of other programs for the poor into block grants managed by the states, shrinks the federal role on priorities like infrastructure and education to a tiny fraction of its current level, and envisions an entirely new tax code that will do much less to encourage home buying and health insurance.

Ryan’s budget is intended to do nothing less than fundamentally transform the relationship between Americans and their government. That, and not deficit reduction, is its real point, as it has been Ryan’s real point throughout his career. [...]

It won’t create jobs this year, and will likely cost jobs in the years to come by putting the economy on a steep austerity ramp. There’s no housing policy for the millions of families in foreclosure and no way to read Ryan’s budget without assuming massive cuts to student-loans programs. That may mean fewer families watching student loans pile up, but only because they didn’t get any in the first place.

As for medical costs, fully 59 percent of Ryan’s savings come from new cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare or other health-care programs —and that omits the $800 billion in Medicare cuts he keeps from Obamacare. So there will be less health-care bureaucracy, sure, but also less health care. The nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that cuts on the order of what Ryan is proposing will mean around 35 million people lose their health-care coverage.

Got that? Paul Ryan demands even more austerity on top of the painful austerity we're already experiencing. And he's demanding even more American austerity as Europe suffers from its ongoing austerity crisis. Clearly, Ryan is on an ideology driven mission. His economic policies just don't add up.

Let's be real here. So much of this nonsense is really just political theater. With the federal budget deadline looming, many Republicans want to "lock in" the nasty budget cuts of the latest manufactured crisis without looking like a bunch of "Springtime Scrooges". So they're hoping Paul Ryan and his Medicare busting budget can do the dirty work for them in shifting "The Overton Window" of the budget debate so far to the right that manufactured crisis induced budget cuts suddenly look "moderate" by comparison.

That's also why supposed "reborn moderate" Dean Heller (R-"Office Space") is joining onto the Senate G-O-TEA bill to defund the Affordable Care Act. Sure, nothing screams "MODERATE!" by threatening one's constituents' health care to demand more job killing austerity. While Heller and his staff fight to squat on precious office space, they're tag-teaming with the likes of Paul Ryan to play games with real peoples' lives.

Of course, Harry Reid is not leaving this unanswered. Rather, Senate Democrats are releasing their own budget plan this week. Here's what we know about it so far.

According to a source familiar with the proposal, Democrats will offer a plan tomorrow that does not simply cut the deficit amid mass unemployment. It takes steps to mitigate the damage the cuts are expected to do to the economy by spending to boost job creation and job training.

According to the source, the plan —which is being presented by Senate Budget Committee Chairperson Patty Murray to the Dem caucus today —replaces the whole sequester and includes a total of $1.85 trillion in deficit reduction, derived from a 50-50 split of cuts and revenues derived from closing tax loopholes. The spending cuts include $275 billion in cuts to health care spending (but no Medicare benefits cuts; the source says cuts would be focused on the provider side), another $200 billion in non-defense spending cuts, $240 billion in defense cuts, and $242 billion in reduced interest rates.

It would spend $100 billion to boost the economy through spending on infrastructure repair and job training —all paid for by closing loopholes and cuts to “wasteful spending.” Total in new revenues: $975 billion. (Details are not yet available.)

Now, surely deficit hawks will find the health care spending cuts wanting. But the point here is that even if you grant that this won’t do much of anything to deal with long term health care costs, this is a generally balanced way to avert the immediate threat posed to the economy by the sequester, if by “balanced,” we mean, “gives both sides some of what they want.” It cuts spending amid the fragile recovery, but does include some stimulus to cushion the impact of deficit reduction. It reduces health care spending while avoiding harm to beneficiaries. Both of those are enabled partly by closing the sort of millionaire loopholes Republicans used to favor closing back when they were trying to do that to avoid raising tax rates on the rich, during the fiscal cliff fight.

Even the Senate Democratic plan has budget cuts. But here, they're at least less severe. And they're somewhat offset by some investment in our economy. If anything, this is a more honest attempt at staking some sort of middle ground in this whacked budget debate on Capitol Hill.

Really, we shouldn't be pursuing any more austerity. This just isn't the right time to pursue large budget cuts. Our economy needs more investment, not less.

Still, something must be done to stop this ongoing manufactured crisis and stop inflicting any more unnecessary economic pain on our people. If Dean Heller and Joe Heck actually want to match their "moderate" words with action, they should stop playing footsie with Paul Ryan and the "tea party"... And encourage their party's leaders to negotiate in good faith with President Obama and Senator Reid to pass a budget that won't inflict any more unnecessary harm on the American economy.

Dean Heller's "Uninvited Guests" at Last Night's NV-Sen Debate

Did you notice what happened at last night's debate? Anjeanette Damon caught a glimpse of it...

Heller went on to say he believes “it’s the responsibility this federal government has to help those who have come by hard times in this economy.”

But Berkley wouldn’t let it slide.

“Look, the fact of the matter is my opponent actually did call unemployed people hobos and that puts him very much in line with what Mitt Romney said about the 47 percent,” Berkley said.

This may have been the continuation of Dean Heller's worst nightmare coming true. He's given so much of himself to his beloved Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, only for them to turn around and bite him in the ass.

How? Both Joan Walsh and Kevin Drum both pointed at Paul Ryan's now infamous plan to "voucher-ize" and cut Medicare to death. And indeed, that's been something that's haunted Mitt Romney ever since he picked Ryan as his running mate. However, there's something that's even more central to Romney's campaign that is now hurting him... And hurting Dean Heller here in Nevada.

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Mitt Romney seems hellbent on self-destructing on the weight of his own 1% privilege and his disdain for the needs and the concerns of the 99%. No matter how he tries to spin away his "47%" comments, we all know what he really meant. And we all know what he still believes.


And guess what? Dean Heller also knows this. That's why he tried so hard last night to run away from Romney & Ryan. It's too bad for him (and so good for Nevada Democrats) that Heller's own extensive record points otherwise.

NV-Sen: Still Mediscared

Surprise! As the 2012 campaign approaches the home stretch, Shelley Berkley releases this ad. Not only does it respond to the recent (false) accusations made by Dean Heller, but it also reminds viewers of Heller's own record on Medicare.



Heller has been peddling the same lies his G-O-TEA colleagues have been saying about the Affordable Care Act and its effect on Medicare. But this time, Berkley isn't letting the lies fly.

Last September, Joe Heck tried to make the same argument. What he tried to do then, and what Heller is trying to do now, is fudge numbers in hopes of obfuscating their support for the Romney-Ryan plan to destroy Medicare by privatizing and "voucher-izing" it.

The problem for Heller, just as it was for Heck, is that his rhetoric doesn't match reality. In fact, the Kaiser Family Foundation recently released a report showing how repealing the Affordable Care Act (as Heller advocates) would actually CUT Medicare benefits for seniors while simultaneously raising costs by reinstating insurance company bailouts that the ACA eliminated. In reality, the ACA actually extends the life of Medicare and strengthens it by providing seniors with more health care while also cutting the waste and abuse in the "Medicare Advantage" insurance industry giveaways.

Again, Dean Heller is just trying to confuse voters by muddying the waters on Medicare. Here is what he doesn't want you to remember about the Romney-Ryan-Heller-Heck G-O-TEA plan to gut Medicare.

Beginning 2023, the guaranteed Medicare benefit would be transformed into a government-financed “premium support” system. Seniors currently under the age of 55 could use their government contribution to purchase insurance from an exchange of private plans or traditional fee-for-service Medicare. But the budget does not take sufficient precautions to prevent insurers from cherry-picking the the healthiest beneficiaries from traditional Medicare and leaving sicker applicants to the government. As a result, traditional Medicare costs could skyrocket, forcing even more seniors out of the government program. The budget also adopts a per capita cost cap of GDP growth plus 0.5 percent, without specifying how it would enforce it. This makes it likely that the cap would limit the government contribution provided to beneficiaries and since the proposed growth rate is much slower than the projected growth in health care costs, CBO estimates that new beneficiaries could pay up to $1,200 more by 2030 and more than $5,900 more by 2050. Finally, the budget would also raise Medicare’s age of eligibility to 67. Some seniors who would no longer be eligible for Medicare would pick up employer coverage—but they would pay more in premiums and cost sharing. And since the budget would scale back or eliminate other coverage options, hundreds of thousands of seniors would become uninsured.

The budget would eliminate the exiting matching-grant financing structure of Medicaid and would instead give each state a pre-determined block grant that does not keep up with actual health care spending. This would shift some of the burden of Medicaid’s growing costs to the states, forcing them to —in the words of the CBO —make cutbacks that “involve reduced eligibility for Medicaid and CHIP, coverage of fewer services, lower payments to providers, or increased cost sharing by beneficiaries—all of which would reduce access to care.” The block grants would reduce federal Medicaid spending by $810 billion over 10 years, decreasing federal Medicaid spending by more than 35 percent over the decade. As a result, states could reduce enrollment by more than 14 million people, or almost 20 percent—even if they are were able to slow the growth in health care costs substantially.

This is the brutal reality that Dean Heller doesn't want you to see. So instead of describing what's actually in his party's plan to decimate "reform" senior health care, he's continuing to peddle lies about the Affordable Care Act. However, it now looks like he won't be able to get away with it any more.

NV-04: Sorry, Baby Tark, But We're Just Not Delusional Like You.

He's back! And this time, he's giving us a real whopper.

Just in case you thought Danny Tarkanian couldn't possibly think of even more stupid shit to flow out of his mouth like verbal diarrhea, you're being proven wrong today. In fact, he's completely contradicting himself (yet again) and he doesn't even seem to notice. So what is Baby Tark saying now? Believe it or not, he signed a "pledge to protect Social Security & Medicare".

OK, so why is this so controversial? And why should you be outraged? Let me explain.

Well, actually I should let Baby Tark explain for himself.



Danny Tarkanian himself said he wanted to privatize Social Security. And in case that's not enough, he reiterated his interest in gutting Social Security just this month!

Tarkanian remarked that the eligibility age for drawing Social Security needs to be raised. He explained that when the Social Security program was first created the life expectancy of recipients was 19 years less than now. He wants a grace period for people nearing retirement but that it could be adjusted for younger workers.

And in case that isn't bad enough, Danny Tarkanian has also endorsed the "Balanced Budget Amendment". Remember that? If enacted, this unbalanced nonsense that "tea party" darlings Dean Heller & Joe Heck love so much would force upon us massive cuts in Social Security, Medicare, and so much more.

And to top it all off, Baby Tark actually has the gall to lie about Steven Horsford and President Obama. Despite the constant debunking of the G-O-TEA lies about the Affordable Care Act and what it actually does, Baby Tark is going there. I guess he hasn't learned from Joe Heck and his attempts to lie his way out of the political dilemma Paul Ryan (along with Mitt Romney now!) has put his entire party into.

Clearly, Danny Tarkanian is desperate. His "tea party" extremism isn't wearing well with NV-04 voters, so he's now trying to make us forget everything he ever promised to the teabaggers. Sorry, Baby Tark, but we're clearly not as delusional or forgetful as you.

Paul Ryan: Mitt Romney's Las Vegas Headliner

He's here! Paul Ryan will be headlining a Mitt Romney campaign rally at Palo Verde High School in Summerlin today... Followed by an uber-exclusive fundraiser with none other than Willard's #1 money man ( Sheldon Adelson) at The Venetian. Wow, what a man of the people. Paul Ryan will be rallying Nevada "TEA-publicans" at the high school serving some of the highest income neighborhoods in the entire state, then he will be raising money from the guy on The Strip who actually makes the bulk of his billions from wheeling & dealing with the Macau mafia. What a guy, that Paul Ryan!

And already, Nevada Republicans are set to give Paul Ryan a very warm welcome. Just look at what they're doing to prepare for his arrival.

The Ryan pick is also shaking up the races that will decide which party controls the Senate. Dean Heller of Nevada — appointed to the Senate last year — is already under fire for the unique distinction of being the only lawmaker who voted for the Ryan budget in both chambers. Montana Republican Senate candidate Denny Rehberg is running fast from the Ryan budget. And in Florida, a state where the senior citizen vote is crucial, vulnerable Democratic Sen. Bill Nelson could barely contain his glee at the opportunity to attack the Ryan budget.

The reality is that Ryan is now all Republicans' running mate whether they like it or not, forcing GOP candidates who would just as soon run from the debate over senior citizen entitlements to embrace the third rail of American politics like never before.

One GOP insider lamented that party leaders “have spent the last year” trying to take Medicare off the political front burner, but the Ryan pick “puts it all back out there now.” [...]

Following the selection, Heller praised Ryan’s “courage to make the tough decisions needed to restore our nation’s fiscal health.” But Democratic Rep. Shelley Berkley saw a ripe opportunity to drive home what Democrats see as Heller’s biggest weakness: voting to reconfigure Medicare.

“No one is happier today than Sen. Dean Heller, one of Rep. Paul Ryan’s strongest supporters who said he was ‘proud’ to vote twice for the Ryan budget plan that essentially ends Medicare by turning it over to private insurance companies.”

Both Joe Heck and Dean Heller are inextricably linked to Paul Ryan and his plan to destroy Medicare by replacing real health care coverage with vouchers. Yet since Mitt Romney has launched Paul Ryan and his quest to end Medicare & Social Security as we know it onto the center stage of the Presidential Campaign, Heller & Heck have to be more careful in tip-toe-ing around their own record of standing with Ryan. After all, about 20% of Nevada's electorate is retired. And even more Nevadans fear the kinds of cutting and gutting of Social Security & Medicare that Paul Ryan has long championed.

Already, Ryan has put Mitt Romney into even more of a precarious situation here in Nevada. But now, the entire ticket is threatened. And if/when Romney & Ryan drag down Heller & Heck with them, they can all thank the Romney-Ryan plan to slash the social safety net for the middle class (to pay for more "billionaire bailouts") for it.

Romney & Ryan, Jumping the Shark...

He did it. He really did it. So where's the shark?



Oh, he's right here!

For now, Romney is still mainly running on an “I’m not the other guy” message. But his party is getting frustrated, because he’s running behind Barack Obama, and there are hints that the gap may be worsening. This is unacceptable to Republicans, who believe Romney should be leading, given the lousy state of the economy. And as with Dole 16 years ago, they’re now turning up the heat on their presumptive nominee to make their specific policy agenda the centerpiece of his fall campaign.

This is the backdrop for the growing calls from the right for Romney to choose Rep. Paul Ryan as his running-mate. The Wisconsin Republican is the author of a budget plan that serves as the Holy Grail of Tea Party-era conservatism. Where Romney is tolerated by the right, Ryan is beloved. The case for going with Romney is essentially the same as the case for Dole embracing supply-side and teaming up with Kemp back in ’96 – reassure and motivate a party base that’s apprehensive and suspicious and wake up the rest of the country by running on a Big Idea with a “bold” running-mate. [...]

Of course, as with Dole and supply-side, this is a move Democrats are dying for Romney to make. Ryan’s plan to turn Medicare into a voucher program provided them with priceless material last year, and they’re already at work tying his budget blueprint – which would necessitate deep cuts in the social safety net and produce “the largest redistribution of income from the bottom to the top in modern U.S. history” – to every Republican on the ballot this fall. For Romney to voluntarily build his general election effort around that plan would be a dream come true for Democratic ad makers.

Here in Nevada, Dean Heller and Joe Heck are learning the hard way. Yet for some reason, Mitt Romney refuses to acknowledge this.

Instead, Romney looks to be doubling down on busting Medicare, shredding Pell Grants and other forms of college financial aid, blowing up Medicaid, and all around destroying the social safety net that has made America's middle class AND economic success possible. As we discussed earlier this week, Mitt Romney has already defined himself as "Mr. 1%". Now that Paul Ryan is officially his running mate, that definition is getting plenty of cement.

And without a doubt, we'll have a stark contrast at the top of the ballot this fall. I just can't believe this is the contrast that Mitt Romney actually wants to make public! But since he's now made that choice, President Obama can now open the political gift that's set to keep on giving (to Democrats).

NV-Sen: The Truth Behind Berkley's New Ads (& Heller's Complaints About Them)

So the pundits are not liking this.



Why? It completely obliterates their previously prepared narrative of, "ZOMG!!! Democrats are running away from Shelley Berkley and her SCANDALS!!!!" They're having such a hard time realizing that somehow her campaign has been able to scoot past Dean Heller's manufactured "controversy" and turn the "scandalous" spotlight back onto Dean Heller and his actual record.

In particular, a handful of pundits are screaming out Berkley calling out Heller for his support of Paul Ryan's Medicare busting plan. While they're arguing over semantics, they're ignoring the fact that "Ryan-care" would indeed end the traditional Medicare system and dramatically raise health care costs for seniors if enacted.

Even a REPUBLICAN member of Congress recently admitted the truth behind Paul Ryan's spin. He even sent a flier to his constituents late last month highlighting his opposition to "Ryan-care"!

House Republicans approved a budget in April that would drive up Medicare costs for seniors, and Mitt Romney has embraced the plan crafted by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI). But not all in the party are in agreement. Ten Republicans voted against Ryan’s budget in April, and now, Rep. David McKinley (R-WV) is campaigning on his opposition to it. [...]

The GOP plan that McKinley opposes would give seniors the option of enrolling in traditional Medicare or taking a stipend to buy their own health care policy on the private market. Republicans have argued it would slow the federal government’s rising costs for Medicare, but the Congressional Budget Office says the plan would increase seniors’ out-of-pocket costs by privatizing Medicare.

In the flier, McKinley says Congress “must balance the budget,” but not on the backs of seniors. McKinley spokesman Jim Forbes told the Los Angeles Times that the congressman “is standing for what he believes in,” but in an election cycle dominated by health care and budget issues, McKinley’s stance is out of step with the rest of his party.

And this is exactly what Shelley Berkley has been saying. Unlike the manufactured "Kidney-gate SCANDAL!!!" about nothing, Heller actually voted for "Ryan-care". And if it's really not as frightening as Berkley's ad suggests, why won't Heller run on it? Why won't he just come out and defend his BFF Paul Ryan? What could he possibly be afraid of?

So keep this in mind as you hear media pundits console Dean Heller's campaign as they whine and complain about Shelley Berkley's new ads.

Where's the Scandal, Dean Heller?

Much has been said about the horrifying "SCANDAL!!!" that Shelley Berkley has been caught in. It's just so gruesomely awful, I tell you! It's... It's...

To all the national pundits who immediately decided to write off Dem Rep. Shelley Berkley's chances in the wake of the House Ethics Committee deciding to continue an investigation into her efforts to save Nevada's only kidney transplant center, I can tell you that the DSCC didn't just reserve $2.3 million in fall ad time to make you look foolish. But it does mean they think you are very wrong in your assessment.

Republican Sen. Dean Heller immediately pounced, though, with a new ad attacking Berkley over these ethics issues. But as commenter DCCyclone astutely observes, the spot is more notable for what it doesn't say. Heller doesn't utter a word about the actual underlying issue—it just vaguely tosses around a claim of corruption—because the transplant center is popular, and rescuing it is a positive for Berkley, even if her nephrologist husband did happen to benefit. As DCC says, "Heller's own ad implicitly admits you can't talk about the issue itself without disarming the attack." What's more, Heller himself tried to save the program, too, so he's not well-situated to make an issue of this.

Oh, so that's what it is. Dean Heller may be pounding his chest while he's doing a victory lap, but he really looks foolish in doing so. For goodness sake, he joined with Shelley Berkley to save UMC's kidney transplant program!

And my gawd, when did saving Nevada's only kidney transplant program become such a "SCANDAL!!!"? And if she's in so much trouble for preventing dialysis patients on Medicare from losing their treatment, then I'll be damned. Even considering that her husband is a nephrologist, there's no evidence proving any wrongdoing.

So why is Dean Heller pounding his chest and doing a victory lap? Even though there's no evidence of wrongdoing, Heller is using this story to paint Berkley as "corrupt" and damage her poll numbers. Oh, and running against a "corrupt" opponent is much easier than running on one's own record, especially if that one is Dean Heller.



After all, he was appointed to the US Senate by Brian Sandoval in a craven attempt to keep John Ensign's Senate seat in Republican hands. As soon as he was appointed, he immediately chose cheap political theater over helping Nevada's working families. He then doubled down on killing Medicare, and he even threatened to destroy the federal government AND the world economy if he didn't see enough middle class families suffer under the debt deal.




But wait, there's more! Dean Heller didn't bother listening to the constituents outside his office demanding he stop bailing out the fossil fuel industry at the expense of working families. He didn't even bother asking his constituents about his unbalanced nonsense plan to throw America into another Great Depression. Oh, and he didn't even bother apologizing to Nevada Latinos for farting in their faces while demanding their votes. And to add even more insult to injury, Dean Heller also went out of his way to wage war against Nevada's women while also managing to demean LGBTQ families.

Perhaps Dean Heller truly thinks we'll just eat up all his "moderate" baloney while slapping Shelley Berkley with a bunch of trumped up charges. I think he's in for a very rude awakening. And I'm seeing past the hyped up "scandal" and noticing the real dirty deed here.

And Now, Joe Heck's "Moderate" Baloney.

Now that Dean Heller is doing "the moderate dance", Joe Heck is joining him on that dance floor.

This week, the Club for Growth, a politically conservative outfit that advocates low spending and limited government, put out its rankings of the freshman, “Tea Party” class in the House. Heck was hovering somewhere around the bottom.

The Club gave Heck a 50 percent conservative ranking, making him the 13th-least conservative of the 87 freshmen in the House. Overall, he ranked somewhere in the middle: 196th out of 430 representatives whose votes were analyzed. (Members who only served partial terms — like Nevada Rep. Mark Amodei — didn’t get a rating.)

The numbers seem to make sense for Heck, who accepted Tea Party support as a candidate but has shied from vocally affiliating himself with the movement as a congressman. Heck’s office refused to comment for this article.

Ah, so Joe Heck now wants to believe he's "moderate" because Club for Growth didn't give him a top score. Give me a break! Here's the number that really matters.

According to a vote breakdown from the Washington Post, Heck votes with the Republican Party about 90 percent of the time.

Just yesterday, Heck voted to show a blind eye to domestic violence against minority and LGBTQ women. In February, Heck tried to justify his opposition to equal access to women's reproductive health care by saying insurance coverage of contraception "has nothing to do with women's health issues". Joe Heck has been front and center in fighting for the G-O-TEA in their War on Women.



But wait, there's more! Joe Heck just this week called marriage equality "a distraction". Oh, and Heck also belittled LGBTQ Nevadans by saying their relationships should not be respected as "traditional marriage". He cited Question 2, but that was enacted a decade ago. Nevada voters have evolved on accepting LGBTQ equality alongside Harry Reid and President Obama. Yet instead of listening to his fellow Nevadans on accepting LGBTQ families and treating us all equally, Joe Heck is joining hands with Mitt Romney and the rest of the G-O-TEA in encouraging discrimination.

And that's not the only issue where Joe Heck is joining hands with Mitt Romney. Along with Romney, Heck supports Paul Ryan's radical budget that ends Medicare as we know it. He's repeatedly stood by Ryan & Romney, and against Nevada seniors who worked hard to earn their Medicare. And in case that isn't bad enough, Heck also wants to repeal the Affordable Care Act, allow insurance companies to deny Americans health care for whatever reason(s) they want, force seniors to pay more for prescription drugs, and increase the federal budget deficit. How on earth is that "moderate"? And more importantly, how does that benefit his constituents?



Perhaps Joe Heck just doesn't care about his constituents. That would explain his opposition to bringing more green jobs to our state. He'll do whatever it takes to protect bailouts for fossil fuel industry billionaires, but do nothing to ensure Nevada's workers get a fair shake and stable work.

So why again are we supposed to think of Joe Heck as "moderate"? Maybe because he's just "moderately" in the pocket of powerful corporate interests? Because he's only "moderately" controlled by the likes of Bank of America and Goldman Sachs? Because he only "moderately" cares more about staying in their good graces and John Boehner's good graces than doing what's best for Nevada? What baloney.

Dean Heller's "Moderate" Baloney

All of a sudden, Dean Heller wants Nevada voters to forget his real record. All of a sudden, Heller now says he's "open" to Marco Rubio's "Kill the DREAM Act" that would permanently make millions of immigrant kids second-class citizens.

Rubio’s suggestion for a DREAM Act would mean that potentially millions of kids who grew up in the United States without the right papers would be forced to be non-voting residents of their home country. Rubio may be using the rhetoric of defending Latinos against right-wing attacks, but the Republican policies don’t play out well for Latinos, specifically on the DREAM Act. The Republican presidential candidates are running on extreme immigration policies, and it would take a lot for Latinos to regain trust in the party. Offering a path to second-class citizenship is not exactly the olive branch Latinos are looking for.

And this is what Dean Heller is "open" to. Second-class citizenship? Mitt Romnney and Kris Kobach may still think it's "amnesty", but this is really nothing more than pointless pandering.

And then, there's this. All of a sudden, Heller wants us to think he opposes Paul Ryan's Medicare busting budget. So now we're supposed to forget Heller's real record? And we're supposed to forget his unbalanced nonsense plan that would destroy Medicare & Social Security if enacted?

Heller is even trying to have it both ways on marriage equality. He claims he "doesn't want to talk about it", but he still managed to (again) state his support for marriage discrimination against LGBTQ Nevadans. So he "doesn't want to talk about it", except when he wants to reassure the radical religious right that he's still "one of them". Lovely.

I can see right through Heller's BS. He's trying to make us forget his real record. He wants us to forget his history of bowing to extreme "tea party" madness. But in today's era of online vote archives & YouTube, Dean Heller will have to find out the hard way that it's not as easy to erase away his own record as he thinks.

It's Back! House Passes "RyanCare" with Joe Heck's Help.

The House today passed Paul Ryan's "Roadmap to Austerity Fueled Poverty" budget plan yet again. And yet again, Joe Heck voted for it. Here are two of Heck's favorite BFFs, Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney, discussing what happened today.

The blueprint by House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan is similar to his controversial Medicare plan last year, in that it ends the health insurance guarantee for seniors and replaces the program with a subsidized insurance-exchange system. Unlike last year’s plan, seniors can buy into traditional Medicare as a sort-of public option, and the vouchers it provides are more generous.

Conservative Republicans see the vote as an opportunity to lay down their marker for the sort of sweeping reforms they hope to enact if they win the presidency. Ryan has urged his party’s presidential candidates to cast the election not as a referendum on President Obama but a choice between two competing visions for the nation’s future.

“Today we will pass our budget that proposes real, honest solutions to create a stronger economy and a more certain future for our country,” House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said on the floor. “Our budget takes bold steps that will get the fiscal house in order and will manage down the debt and deficit.”

As it turns out, Democrats would love to fight the battle on those terms. They’re expected to make Medicare a focal point of their election message, portraying Republicans as seeking to “break the Medicare guarantee” in order to fund large tax cuts for the rich.

“Our main focus will be on Medicare,” the Democratic aide said. “There’s clear evidence that seniors are very worried about what Republicans are doing with Medicare. And we want people to know that this is who they are in a nutshell. There’s no wiggle room for them.”

Mitt Romney, the likely Republican presidential nominee, praised the Ryan plan. “Owing in no small part to the leadership of Paul Ryan, [the House] has put conservative fiscal principles into action and passed a bold budget that directly addresses the drivers of our nation’s spending crisis,” he said in a statement. “The House budget and my own plan share the same path forward: pro-growth tax cuts, getting federal spending under control, and strengthening entitlement programs for future generations.”

Now that sounds all fine and dandy. What's wrong with what Paul and Willard said? Here's what's wrong: They're lying.



Paul Ryan's budget dumps another $187,000 tax cut on the lap of every multi-millionaire and billionaire. Yet while the ultra-wealthy are getting another "bailout", the working poor suffer as 62% of Ryan's proposed budget cuts hit programs like Medicaid and Pell Grants that are meant to lift Americans out of poverty. Oh, and let's not forget the centerpiece of Paul Ryan's budget, which is his "RyanCare" plan to end Medicare as we know it and force seniors to pay up to $5,900 more for health care. Even retired military officers have come out against Paul Ryan's budget because of his proposed cuts to international programs meant to keep America safe.

Even Mitt Romney backer and professional "reality TV" attention seeker Donald Trump admitted that this is a losing issue for Republicans.



So why is Joe Heck yet again tying himself to Paul Ryan's nonsense? Oh, that's right. He thinks he can lie his way out of this!



If even Paul Ryan's own constituents can't stand what he's trying to do to our country, what makes Joe Heck think he can get away with this here in Nevada? Between his own "Destroying America's Trust in Our Economy Act" and his constant votes for Paul Ryan's dangerous austerity agenda, Heck is sending us the message that he cares more about pleasing Paul Ryan and the rest of the House G-O-TEA leadership than doing what's right for Nevada's working families. All Heck is doing is proving Mr. Gleaner's point that he's nothing more than a G-O-TEA tool.

Yes, Nevada GOP, You Still Want to Kill Medicare If You Support Paul Ryan's Budget.

So The Beltway's favorite gossip rag, Politico, has a breathless piece this morning about the new G-O-TEA plan to sell Paul Ryan's "Doom of Austerity" plan to America: Just don't talk about what's actually in it!

Last year, they were blindsided by the backlash to the Wisconsin Republican’s plan. It was immediately framed by Democrats as ending Medicare, crushing Medicaid while keeping taxes low for the rich. Ryan, who was being pitched as a presidential prospect for the party, receded as his plan came under attack from all sides.
The 2012 plan is — simply put — to not talk about the plan too much. [...]

GOP leaders are suggesting members use props. In a presentation, the NRCC said members should try to “inoculate” themselves in a campaign season by using “credible third-party validators (mom or seniors),” according to a party document.

Above all, the Ryan budget rollout was designed to conform to a new political reality for Republicans: Changing entitlements is difficult, not popular but necessary. And even the true believers — like Ryan himself — need to build coalitions when they pitch big ideas.

To ensure the plan landed well nationally, Ryan personally reached out to presidential candidates to brief them on it. Romney endorsed the plan this week.

And DC Republicans are pointing to Mark Amodei's win in NV-02 last year as living proof of their plan working (politically, that is).

Amodei gave up talking about the particulars of the Ryan budget. He started saying the status quo was unsustainable. He tagged Marshall as supporting Obama’s health care bill, which he said cut from Medicare. When talking about the Republican plan, he said it would “save and protect” the senior health care program.

Amodei sent out direct mail that branded him as the “the one candidate working to protect Medicare.” They enlisted his mother to star in an advertisement vouching he would protect the program.

The contrast worked. [...]

“Here’s what I’m real comfortable telling people,” Amodei said in an interview in Washington on Wednesday. “I’ll tell you the truth about your program, and I’ll fight to save it, but in order to tell you the truth and to fight to save it, you can’t continue to do nothing. Can you fix it all in a year? Absolutely not. Can you fix it in five years? No you can’t. But you better start now.”

Here's what Politico is missing. First off, Barack Obama isn't behaving like Kate Marshall. Secondly, it doesn't look like Shelley Berkley, John Oceguera, or Steven Horsford plans to behave like Kate Marshall. Thirdly, Paul Ryan's plan would still destroy Medicare if enacted. And finally, Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum have wholly embraced Paul Ryan and his plan to destroy Medicare. That's why House Republicans are spinning this like crazy now.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

However, they can't just spin away the facts. The fact of the matter is that Paul Ryan's new budget slashes and privatizes Medicare and Medicaid to death just as much as Paul Ryan's old budget.

Beginning 2023, the guaranteed Medicare benefit would be transformed into a government-financed “premium support” system. Seniors currently under the age of 55 could use their government contribution to purchase insurance from an exchange of private plans or traditional fee-for-service Medicare. But the budget does not take sufficient precautions to prevent insurers from cherry-picking the the healthiest beneficiaries from traditional Medicare and leaving sicker applicants to the government. As a result, traditional Medicare costs could skyrocket, forcing even more seniors out of the government program. The budget also adopts a per capita cost cap of GDP growth plus 0.5 percent, without specifying how it would enforce it. This makes it likely that the cap would limit the government contribution provided to beneficiaries and since the proposed growth rate is much slower than the projected growth in health care costs, CBO estimates that new beneficiaries could pay up to $1,200 more by 2030 and more than $5,900 more by 2050. Finally, the budget would also raise Medicare’s age of eligibility to 67. Some seniors who would no longer be eligible for Medicare would pick up employer coverage—but they would pay more in premiums and cost sharing. And since the budget would scale back or eliminate other coverage options, hundreds of thousands of seniors would become uninsured.

The budget would eliminate the exiting matching-grant financing structure of Medicaid and would instead give each state a pre-determined block grant that does not keep up with actual health care spending. This would shift some of the burden of Medicaid’s growing costs to the states, forcing them to — in the words of the CBO — make cutbacks that “involve reduced eligibility for Medicaid and CHIP, coverage of fewer services, lower payments to providers, or increased cost sharing by beneficiaries—all of which would reduce access to care.” The block grants would reduce federal Medicaid spending by $810 billion over 10 years, decreasing federal Medicaid spending by more than 35 percent over the decade. As a result, states could reduce enrollment by more than 14 million people, or almost 20 percent—even if they are were able to slow the growth in health care costs substantially.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

This explains why Joe Heck has often danced around his own vote for "RyanCare". Remember when he lied about Medicare, and President Obama's position on Medicare, last September in Summerlin as he tried to excuse his vote for Paul Ryan's budget?



Joe Heck has to do this. On one hand, he has to look "moderate" in order to win reelection in NV-03. But on the other hand, he's still expected to mostly be a loyal follower of Paul Ryan and "Tea Party, Inc." So what's someone like Heck to do? Oh, just lie about Medicare and lie about Democrats' position on Medicare!

When House Republicans unveil their 2012 budget on Tuesday, they are expected to include a Medicare privatization plan endorsed by one Democrat — Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR). That, Republicans will claim, proves their controversial overhaul proposal has bipartisan support.

Leading Democrats say they won’t let the GOP get away with it.

“We don’t see a difference in principle between the original Ryan plan and the so-called Wyden-Ryan plan,” Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) a party surrogate on health care issues, told reporters on a conference call Monday morning. “It’s equally bad or only marginally different but still would end Medicare as we know it.” [...]

“They [seniors] don’t want Medicare itself to be diminished in some way,” Schakowsky said, “or to become too expected and therefore ruined.”

So no matter how hard both the national G-O-TEA and Nevada's G-O-TEA representatives try to spin Paul Ryan's new budget proposal as a "bold, courageous, bipartisan plan to save Medicare", it's really just another attempt to pass the same old plan to destroy Medicare and take away needed health care from many Nevadans.

What's Behind This New Budget Fight

Recently, Bruce Springsteen released his new single, "We Take Care of Our Own". And just last week, President Obama announced this song will be part of his reelection campaign's playlist.



And interestingly enough, one won't just hear this song on the campaign trail. In a way, the spirit of this song can also be found in the President's new ten year budget plan.

In his 10 year budget, set to be released to the public late Monday morning, Obama will advocate a series of tax and spending policies that emphasize near-term economic growth, long term investments in education and research, an enduring social safety net, and over a trillion dollars in new revenue over 10 years taken from wealthy individuals and corporations, based on tax reforms that enshrine the so-called “Buffett rule.”

The document is intended to stand as a moderately progressive alternative to the infamous budget House Republicans adopted overwhelmingly last spring — and are set to readopt with some tweaks later this year. That budget calls for reducing taxes on high-income Americans, and for filling the revenue hole by slashing or phasing out key support programs — most notably Medicare.

Even though all the key elements of Obama's budget are strongly popular with Americans, Congressional Republicans are already vowing to fight all of it tooth and nail. Of course, they also want to resurrect at least the bulk of Paul Ryan's extreme Medicare-destroying budget that would also slash to death other parts of America's social safety net, such as Medicaid and student aid. Even though "The Ryan Plan" would do absolutely nothing to reduce the federal budget deficit, the House G-O-TEA faction looks to be mostly doubling down on this nonsense.

For Congressional Republicans, this is just another effort to prove to their "TEA" (party) infused base that they don't care about poor people while they do care about opposing anything and everything President Obama proposes. That's all this is about. They're playing raw primary politics. They're worried about the "enthusiasm gap" now plaguing their party, so Republicans are willing to pull the budget brinksmanship card yet again to get the "tea party" base revved up and behind them (and avoid more primary challenges).

Oh, and don't forget the G-O-TEA's BFFs on Wall Street. The big financial firms are set to spend record amounts of money in this next election, and G-O-TEA leadership expects the big Wall Street firms to "make it rain" on its candidates. Of course before that happens, the big Wall Street firms expect Congressional Republicans to continue delivering on obstructing financial regulatory reform and progressive tax reform before asking for more campaign donations and supportive Super PAC formations.

So basically, this may be 2011 Budget Battle Royale redux... Except that President Obama has already wizened up to the G-O-TEA games, and that the American public is getting sick and tired of Congress doing nothing to help improve the economy. And remember, this is an election year. This time if/when Republicans in Congress yet again threaten to blow up the federal government over ridiculous pandering to the radical right, they will face consequences this fall. And even though President Obama's budget plan may not be implemented this year, it's still important to let Americans know his vision and give voters a clear choice for November.

Joe Heck Lied About Medicare... AND President Obama!

Joe Heck finally held a town hall meeting in his district. At least we got that... Even though it was at the very edge of civilization, and even though Heck tried his hardest not to directly answer "difficult" questions. Here he is dancing around his own vote to kill Medicare...



And not only couldn't he muster up the "courage" to mention Paul Ryan and his plan to kill Medicare by name, but he even LIED about what President Obama said! Here are Obama's own words on Medicare...



Go back to 1:20 on the first video to catch Heck's whopper on Obama and Medicare. Again, here is President Obama describing his own proposal to make health care more efficient.



This is what the Presdient proposed:

Many of these proposals build on the savings in the Affordable Care Act and most have already been introduced by the administration in the President’s April deficit reduction proposal. He’s offering $248 billion in Medicare savings and $72 billion in savings from Medicaid and other health care programs. Raising the Medicare eligibility age — which the administration had flirted with in the past — is off the table and instead the President is focusing on finding savings on the provider end, while also asking wealthier beneficiaries to pay more for coverage. [...]

Bottom line is — if what’s driving health care costs at the federal level is national health expenditures, modernization that addresses costs and pays for more efficient care is really the only way of producing long-term savings. Proposals like expanding IPAB and changing payment rates to promote greater efficiency and reduce hospital readmissions are initiatives that will begin to move us in that direction.

And this is Paul Ryan's plan that Joe Heck voted for:

Ryan’s “premium support” proposal for Medicare wouldn’t do anything to actually lower the nation’s health care spending. Rather, it reduces government expenditures by asking future enrollees to pay more for their health care coverage. Future seniors would be taken out of the traditional Medicare program and given a “premium support” to purchase more expensive private coverage. As the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) concluded in its analysis of the Ryan proposal, “a typical beneficiary would spend more for health care…[because] private plans would cost more than traditional Medicare.” ”This would more than double out-of-pocket health-care spending by a typical senior to $12,500 per year.”

See the difference? Paul Ryan's Kill Medicare Plan forces all future seniors to give up traditional Medicare in favor of vouchers, and it would even increase health care costs for current seniors on Medicare.

“This analysis shows the immediate and long-term impacts of these changes in the 3rd Congressional District in Nevada, which is represented by Rep. Joseph J. Heck.

The Republican proposal would have adverse impacts on seniors and disabled individuals in the district who are currently enrolled in Medicare. It would:

• Increase prescription drug costs for 9,500 Medicare beneficiaries in the district who enter the Part D do-nut hole, forcing them to pay an extra $94 million for drugs over the next decade.

• Eliminate new preventive care benefits for 120,000 Medicare beneficiaries in the district.

The Republican proposal would have even greater impacts on individuals in the district age 54 and younger who are not currently enrolled in Medicare. It would:

• Deny 780,000 individuals age 54 and younger in the district access to Medicare’s guaranteed benefits.

• Increase the out-of-pocket costs of health coverage by over $6,000 per year in 2022 and by almost $12,000 per year in 2032 for the 155,000 individuals in the district who are between the ages of 44 and 54.

• Require the 155,000 individuals in the district between the ages of 44 and 54 to save an additional $36.2 billion for their retirement – an average of $182,000 to $287,000 per individual – to pay for the increased cost of health coverage over their lifetimes. Younger residents of the district will have to save even higher amounts to cover their additional medical costs.

• Raise the Medicare eligibility age by at least one year to age 66 or more for 89,000 individuals in the district who are age 44 to 49 and by two years to age 67 for 624,000 individuals in the district who are age 43 or younger. “

President Obama has stated he supports none of this, and would rather see costs controlled by making wealthier seniors pay what they can afford while cutting provider costs and ending insurance industry giveaways. We've already seen this in the Affordable Care Act, and that's what we will continue to see if this proposal is implemented.

Studies have shown that Medicare is far better at controlling costs than private insurers, yet Ryan and Heck continue to mislead on this.



So now, all of a sudden, they're claiming President Obama agrees with them. The fact of the matter is that he doesn't, and that Democratic proposals to enact savings in Medicare and Medicaid are far different than what the "G-O-TEA" has offered. And if Heck is serious about "ending the scare tactics", he can start himself by declining to repeat the lie that "Medicare is going broke", and the only way to "fix" it is by implementing full privatization.

NV-02: Mediscared

(Also at Daily Kos)

Who knew this would yet again be THE hot button issue in yet another special Congressional election? It all seems to be coming down to Medicare, Medicare, & Medicare.

In [the NY-26 special election], Democrat Kathy Hochul went up early and hard against her Republican opponent, accusing her of seeking to kill Medicare because she supported Rep. Paul Ryan’s budget proposal. It took weeks for Republican Jane Corwin to respond.

When Hochul won the heavily GOP district, the Republicans-want-to-kill-Medicare message quickly became a national strategy, and Democrats posited that by using it they could take back the House.

Marshall has followed that playbook, focusing two of her three attack ads on Amodei’s evolving position on Ryan’s plan to revamp Medicare.

But neither national Republicans nor Amodei are letting the attacks go unchallenged. An Amodei TV ad features his mother and accuses Marshall of lying about his record.

This is what has Mark Amodei freaking out.

In addition to pushing the national momentum on Medicare, Marshall’s campaign thinks Amodei is vulnerable on the issue. The district is home to many seniors.

Early in the campaign, Amodei called Ryan’s proposal a good starting point. When he was working to get the Republican central committee’s nomination, he said he would “cozy up” to Ryan to get his plan passed.

A local Reno news station tried to debunk Mark Amodei's misleading ads...



But honestly, even KTVN got some facts wrong! For instance, the "Medicare cuts" that Amodei claims Marshall supports, and that KTVN claims were passed as part of the Affordable Care Act last year, are really provisions ensuring that Medicare funds are redirected to better patient care instead of being wasted on insurance industry profits (aka "Medicare Advantage") and other forms of waste & abuse. In addition, the Affordable Care Act actually improves Medicare coverage by lowering prescription drug costs and providing free preventive care!

This is what President Obama and the Democratic 111th Congress did to strengthen and improve health care for seniors.



Now contrast this with what House Republicans have been pushing for.



And Mark Amodei most definitely supports Paul Ryan's GOP-teabagger plan to kill Medicare. And despite what Amodei claims, the fact of the matter is that "The Paul Ryan Kill Medicare Plan" that he supported will indeed affect seniors currently on Medicare.

Amodei can spin all he wants, but the facts are simply not on his or Paul Ryan's side.

That’s not how Ryan’s plan works. For one thing, it eliminates traditional fee-for-service Medicare. For another, Its savings come from capping the growth of federal spending at inflation — which is much, much, much slower than the rate of health-care cost growth. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that, in 2022, Ryan’s plan would have a typical beneficiary shouldering 61 percent of the cost of a standard plan, and by 2030, because the government would limit its contributions, they’d be paying 68 percent. [... I]t’s absolutely central to how the Ryan budget saves money. It’s the core of his proposal.

And considering this along with Ryan's and Congressional Republicans' increasingly ugly poll numbers, no wonder why Amodei is so scared that he's trying his hardest to run away from his support for "Ryancare". He can run, but can he really hide? Not if we don't let him!

NV-02: Maybe Xenophobia & Teabagger Scare Tactics Aren't the Answer?

(Also at Daily Kos)



Mark Amodei may be basking in the radioactive glow of his daringly xenophobic campaign ad. But ask Nevada tourism officials about it, and they're getting worried.

That concern is real, said [Republican] Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki, who has spent considerable energy developing Nevada’s Chinese tourism market.

Krolicki described the relationship with China as important and delicate. He noted the value of Nevada’s exports to China has grown to $456 million from $13.6 million in the past decade.

“Certainly it raised an eyebrow,” Krolicki said of the ad. “But I take it as a flare glaring over Washington, D.C., and its policies and deficits and not a negative to our Chinese partners.”

One economic development official, who didn’t want to publicly criticize Amodei, said he has been contacted by Chinese consulate officials who were irritated by the ad.

“I think they feel like ‘why do you even have to use us in some kind of pejorative way to make a message,’” the official said. “This ad makes you have to go through the calculation of ‘are we being racist or beating up on the horrible financial decisions made in Washington D.C.?’

“The fact is China is a very important trade partner for Nevada and this stuff isn’t helpful.”

So why is Mark Amodei stooping down to use "this stuff" in a desperate ploy to boost his campaign? Maybe the same reason why Sharron Angle stooped down to similar "stuff" last year?





They both have to distract from their own records. We all remember Angle's story... But what about Amodei? Well, it's complicated. First off, he's afraid of NV-02 becoming the next NY-26...

Firing the opening shot on the debt ceiling is also an attempt to pivot away from Wisconsin Republican Rep. Paul Ryan’s divisive budget plan and, specifically, the controversial Medicare provisions Democrats view as a lightning rod with the political voltage to rocket the party back within grasp of a House majority.

It’s been less than a month since Democrats’ surprise win in a special upstate New York congressional race that was defined by Ryan’s plan. Though the dynamics of the upcoming Nevada race don’t provide an exact parallel, they feel similar messaging can only pay dividends in a district where they’ll again be underdogs.

“This ad does not mention the words ‘Nevada’ or ‘jobs.’ Considering Amodei announced his support for the Heller-Heck plan to end Medicare last Saturday, it’s no surprise his first ad highlights how out of touch Nevada Republicans are,” Nevada Democratic Party spokesman Zach Hudson saidin a swipe at all three of his GOP targets, including freshman Rep. Joe Heck.

During a debate prior to the selection meeting last week, Amodei praised the Ryan blueprint. “I like a lot of what he has to say in terms of Medicare. I think that’s excellent.”

Oh, yes. You heard them right. Amodei doesn't want us even think of the word "Medicare"... Especially if it's used in the same sentence as Paul Ryan and privatization!





After all, look at what happens when House Republicans have to answer about their support for Paul Ryan's "Kill Medicare" plan!



Hold on, this sounds familiar. Where have we heard this before?



But in one respect, Amodei provides a new angle on this. If he's that serious about not voting for any revision to the federal debt ceiling, then he must support raising taxes, cutting Medicare & Social Security, and/or cutting military spending. So which "poison" will Amodei pick? I have a feeling he doesn't want any of us to remember his own words and deeds in 2003.

The whole McCarthy-esque red-scare theme of the ad is bad enough. But pledging to never vote to raise the debt ceiling is to call for financial suicide on a nationwide scale. It is like telling the bank you are going to stop making payments on your mortgage and credit cards. Banks don’t take too kindly to things like this, and the result would not be good for your credit rating. Not raising the debt ceiling — which would be required even if Democrats adopted the recently-passed GOP budget bill — would destroy the country’s credit rating and cause interest rates on government securities to skyrocket, making the debt problem far, far worse. It’s hard to predict the collateral damage such an action would have on the economy in general, but it wouldn’t be good. [...]

Of course Amodei and other Republicans are playing politics with the national debt, which they had no problem with when George W. Bush was racking up more than $5 trillion on the nation’s credit card, or when Ronald Reagan tripled the debt in the 1980s.

But for Amodei to take the extreme position and say he would vote against raising the debt ceiling is totally uncharacteristic of the person I know. After all, Amodei was the co-sponsor of the 2003 bill that created the largest tax increase in state history at that time, a compromise he worked out with Democrats. This doesn’t sound anything like the Amodei who is now threatening to destroy the country’s credit rating. It’s as if some evil spirit has taken control of the old Amodei and created a monster. [...]

Amodei’s transformation from moderate to crazy conservative happened so head-snappingly fast that it makes me wonder if the man has any core principles. Perhaps the moderate Amodei we saw before was just an illusion, the performance of a politician who just tells people whatever they want to hear, regardless of the truth.

But one thing for certain is that fire of ambition I saw in Amodei before is in total control now. It is his master, and his only constituent. If he does get elected to Congress, good luck trying to get him to do anything that doesn’t involve feeding his ambition.

So who is Mark Amodei? Really? He seemed quite moderate when he served in Carson City. Hell, he even voted for the largest tax increase in state history in 2003! He didn't have a problem cutting that deal before when he knew Nevada needed more revenue.

But now that he's running for Congress and desperate to win the teabaggers' favor, Mark Amodei wants to force America to default on our debt and rip apart at the seams the very social safety net our society depends upon? What happened?

Maybe this is why Mark Amodei wants to distract us with his xenophobic "Red Scare" ad.

Joe Heck AGAIN Attacks Medicare & Social Security

Joe Heck did it... AGAIN! Go ahead and listen for yourself.

But in case you can't, the transcript is below.

Robert: Congressman Heck, I just wanted to thank you, you know, because I’m a working man just like the rest of you and you’re absolutely right: Social Security is a pyramid scheme. And, you know, I’m just (unintelligible) because the money I’m paying right now I am paying for other peoples’ futures and fewer and fewer people are paying for my benefits as well. And that’s not what Social Security is intended for. Why aren’t more people talking about this, and what can Washington do to starting doing something to fix it?

Heck: Yeah, it’s a great question Robert and you’re exactly right. You know back in 1955 there were nine people paying in for every person collecting. By 1973 that dropped down to three to one. It’s projected that over the next 20 years it will be down to two to one. You know and it’s already said that Social Security is probably going to be insolvent in about 20 years. So we can wait until 20 years from now to take action, or we can take action now. And like you I’ve been paying into Social Security for almost 32 years and want to make sure that there’s a benefit there when I retire. I co-sponsored a bill that would say that Social Security contributions from your paycheck go into a fund that can only be used to pay for Social Security. You know, Congress… previous Congresses have raided the trust fund for other pet projects and to try to balance the budget and use it for other projects. We’ve got to make sure that the money going in goes specifically to those that are expecting a benefit at some point in time. And then we’re going to have to look at a lot of other options to put on the table to make sure that the program remains viable and stable. It’s a matter of leadership. You know, previous Congress has done nothing about the debt. They show no leadership on the debt and now we’re in a debt crisis. They are showing no leadership on Medicare and we are approaching a Medicare crisis. And if nobody wants to show leadership on Social Security we’ll have the same crisis in about 20 years. [emphasis mine]

Not only is Joe Heck doubling down on calling Social Security a "pyramid scheme", but he also throws out plenty of false "facts" he intends to use to scare us into privatizing Medicare and Social Security. When Heck was bragging about "taking action", was he talking about House Republicans' proposed (Un)SAFE Act to starve away Social Security by replacing it with private accounts? Does he really want to risk seniors' economic security with a corrupt privatization scheme?

Wait, doesn't this sound familiar? It should.

So now, Sharrontology Obtuse Angle claims she isn't really for abolishing Social Security... Even though she is. And the media are chattering away about why we're not seeing more "open dialogue on reforming Social Security". Sound familiar? It should. George Bush tried this exact same tactic in 2005, and the corporate media were cheerleading it on until the waves of protests all over the country killed the proposal...

Or did it? It seems Sharrontology wants to revive it. And like Bush in 2005, she's using the same ol' "It's going broke!!!!" scare tactics to goad us into letting her throw starving seniors onto the streets to "fend for themselves" like they should in a "free market".

So here's the problem. Obtuse Angle isn't giving us the full story.Social Security is NOT "going broke".



I know, I know. It's not as dramatic as the "Oh noezzz, Social Security is BROKE!!!!" storyline you hear in the corporate media and you see parroted by radical right GOoPers like Sharrontology. But let's face it, there's no real "CRISIS!!!!" here. 

Contrary to what Sharron Angle and Joe Heck would have us believe, Social Security is A-O-K as it is. But by privatizing the system and getting rid of its cash flow, then and only then is the system in danger of collapsing. The Social Security Trust Fund is currently running a surplus. But if the system were to be turned over to Wall Street, upwards of $4.5 trillion would be needed to privatize Social Security for current workers while simultaneously handling the current caseload of retirees. Where will we get that kind of money? I thought House Republicans didn't support this kind of "borrow and spend" fiscal policy.

Of course, that's what Joe Heck doesn't want us to see. He just wants us to believe he's fighting the "big bad guv'mint pyramid scheme!"

But wait, there's more! Joe Heck also reiterated this morning that he supports Paul Ryan's "Kill Medicare" Plan. And yet again, he's using buzzwords like "CRISIS!" and "leadership" to distract us from what Paul Ryan's "Kill Medicare" Plan will do in Nevada's 3rd Congressional District if enacted.

The Republican proposal would have adverse impacts on seniors and disabled individuals in the district who are currently enrolled in Medicare. It would:

• Increase prescription drug costs for 9,500 Medicare beneficiaries in the district who enter the Part D do-nut hole, forcing them to pay an extra $94 million for drugs over the next decade.

• Eliminate new preventive care benefits for 120,000 Medicare beneficiaries in the district.

The Republican proposal would have even greater impacts on individuals in the district age 54 and younger who are not currently enrolled in Medicare. It would:

• Deny 780,000 individuals age 54 and younger in the district access to Medicare’s guaranteed benefits.

• Increase the out-of-pocket costs of health coverage by over $6,000 per year in 2022 and by almost $12,000 per year in 2032 for the 155,000 individuals in the district who are between the ages of 44 and 54.

• Require the 155,000 individuals in the district between the ages of 44 and 54 to save an additional $36.2 billion for their retirement – an average of $182,000 to $287,000 per individual – to pay for the increased cost of health coverage over their lifetimes. Younger residents of the district will have to save even higher amounts to cover their additional medical costs.

• Raise the Medicare eligibility age by at least one year to age 66 or more for 89,000 individuals in the district who are age 44 to 49 and by two years to age 67 for 624,000 individuals in the district who are age 43 or younger. “

So that's what Joe Heck really wants to force upon us in Nevada... And nationwide! Look at the above facts and figures. Does that look like "solving a crisis" or creating one?