Home > elections > Congressional candidate Susan Adams in Humboldt this weekend

Congressional candidate Susan Adams in Humboldt this weekend

[In addition to her two appearances in Humboldt, Susan Adams will be live on KHUM today at 11am]

[Press announcement]

Susan L. Adams, a registered nurse practitioner, a County Supervisor and candidate to be Humboldt’s next Congressional Representative will be in Northern Humboldt for a series of “meet and greet” events where you can hear from and ask questions of the candidate. California’s newly formed 2nd District which includes Humboldt County, will run from the Golden Gate Bridge to the Oregon Boarder,

On Saturday Oct 29th from 1:30 pm – 2:30pm, Susan will address the Humboldt State University Democratic Club at Redwood Yogurt located at 1573 G Street in Northtown, Arcata. The general public is welcome to attend.

On Sunday Oct 30th from 1:30 pm – 2:30pm, Susan will host a public forum at Trinidad Town Hall (Civic Room) located at 409 Trinity St. in Trinidad.

To RSVP or for more information about Adams’ visit to Humboldt County from Oct 28th to the 30th, please call the campaign at (707) 376-8683 or visit http://www.susanadamsforcongress.com.

Susan Adams is running for Congress to fight for the priorities of communities here in Coastal Northern California. She will work hard to rebuild thriving economies, protect health and access to quality care, apply innovative solutions to public safety and implement clean renewable energy programs which will benefit communities for generations to come.

As a maternity clinical specialist and a women’s health nurse practitioner, Adams has dedicated her life to health families. As a public servant, she has worked to create health communities. Currently Adams represents the 1st District on the Marin County Board of Supervisors where she has earned a reputation for innovative solutions to local problems, including her work on green energy jobs and therapeutic justice programs.

Adams is a mother and grandmother. Her brother has served seven tours of duty overseas compelling her to work even harder to bring our men and women home and she will continue to make veterans’ affairs a top priority—including their post war after care. Her family has owned a ranch in Boonville, Mendocino for several generations.

She has served at the National Association of Counties on the Health Steering Committee, was appointed to the California Chief Justice’s Task Force on Mentally Ill Offenders and has served with county supervisors in all 58 California counties on the State Association and serves in a leadership position for the National Association of Counties Health Committee.

More information at http://www.susanadamsforcongress.com

  1. October 28, 2011 at 12:03 pm

    … and the point is?

  2. Anonymous
    October 28, 2011 at 3:59 pm

    The point is What will the candidates stand for. Comparison and

    similarities must go to the voters.

  3. October 28, 2011 at 4:29 pm

    There are at least two Democratic candidates worth looking at (Adams and Solomon is another and there might be more) but sadly until the Democratic Party gets its head out of its ass concerning cannabis and prohibition I won’t be voting for any Democratic candidate.

    Are you listening Obama?

    have a peaceful day,

  4. Walt
    October 28, 2011 at 5:56 pm

    Here are some questions to ask:

    1. Will you work for Single Payer healthcare? (and do you have a plan?)

    2. Will you work for full legalization of Marijuana?

    3. Will you work to end corporate “personhood”?

    4. Will you work to close Guantanamo concentration camp, end the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (including pulling out mercenaries) and end drone strikes on sovereign nations with whom we are not at war?

    5. If not, why do you expect us to vote for you?

  5. longwind
    October 28, 2011 at 6:07 pm

    As of now, I’m voting for Walt.

  6. October 28, 2011 at 6:58 pm

    With you Walt, good list.

    have a peaceful day,

  7. Anonymous
    October 28, 2011 at 7:08 pm

    Corporate personhood. You can’t have it both ways. You want to tax a corp when all the individuals who own it are already being taxed? Ok. Tax it. but then it also needs to have the rights of an individual. You don’t want it to have the rights of an individual? You can’t tax it, sue it. You have to sue the individuals who own it.

  8. October 28, 2011 at 7:39 pm

    Anon, your argument is total bullshit. No imaginary entity “needs to have the rights of an individual.” The Bill of Rights was written to protect people not corporations.

    have a peaceful day,

  9. Anonymous
    October 28, 2011 at 8:11 pm

    Then why tax a non person when they will all be taxed on their own returns? It’s double taxation.

  10. October 28, 2011 at 8:45 pm

    Why not tax a non-person if we want to? Non persons don’t have any right not to be taxed, or any right not to be double taxed if that is what you insist on calling it.

    This is simple logic and you are failing.

    have a peaceful day,

  11. Mitch
    October 29, 2011 at 9:46 am

    Susan Adams has my vote — she had me at “nurse.”

    Like most Americans, I think, I am sick to death of the egocentric talk-professionals who populate Congress, the media, and the upper ranks of American business. Too many lawyers and salespeople, not enough nurses. A willingness to change bed-pans should be a prerequisite for “service” in Congress. Too many men, not enough women.

    I know there are several good candidates running. I no longer care how well they can articulate the issues, because the issues have been obvious for decades. I want people who understand sickness and vulnerability, and who have a demonstrated record of caring enough to help in unglamorous ways.

    Susan Adams for Congress.

  12. October 29, 2011 at 9:52 am

    Mitch, although I am not going to vote for her unless the Democratic Party makes some changes in regards to cannabis, global warfare and single payer health care, I do share your high regard of the nursing profession in general and that is a positive for her, for sure.

    I will be looking for a Green, a P & F, a socialist, or a left independent until things change, until the Democratic Party comes back to the people.

    have a peaceful day,

  13. Mitch
    October 29, 2011 at 9:56 am

    I wish I could vote for her and vote against the two main parties simultaneously, Bill. I really do.

  14. October 29, 2011 at 10:01 am

    I know its a dilemma. Though I am a regular big critic of the Democratic party, I do meet lots of Democrats who are simpatico, who are in agreement with me, and I with them, on many issues.

    The debate is whether people like me should join the Democratic Party and help the left reclaim it, or should we work in a third party context. My personal view is that the Democratic Party is corrupt beyond reform, and must be abandoned if any real change is to come. But the debate is honest with some points on both sides.

    have a peaceful day,

  15. Anonymous
    October 29, 2011 at 10:43 am

    One big omission: Adams’ website does not have the words gay or lesbian on it. Solomon’s website states his full and unconditional support for gay rights, including full marriage equality. I’m voting for Solomon.

  16. Mitch
    October 29, 2011 at 10:52 am


    All five agreed on the principle of marriage equality, with Adams saying it is a personal matter for her as the mother of a lesbian.

  17. Dust Devil
    October 29, 2011 at 10:56 am

    Ugh, what a crappy website.

    She obviously paid a lot of money to put it up, but the widgets don’t even work properly, things stick open.

    Also as anonymous 10:43 noted there is nothing there but focus group buzz phrases and no specific ideas on how to do anything.

    It is still early maybe she will come forward with real positions but as for now, pass. And I hope she fixes her website.

  18. Anonymous
    October 29, 2011 at 11:20 am

    This is from Solomon’s website:

    “Equality for Gays and Lesbians

    I believe that all Americans should be accorded equal rights, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
    I applaud President Obama for ending “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” a discriminatory policy that banned gays from serving openly in the armed forces.

    I support the right to marry for all consenting adults. The so-called Defense of Marriage Act should be repealed.

    I strongly support passage of an inclusive Employment Non-Discrimination Act to prohibit discrimination against gay, lesbian, and transgender workers.”

    Adams doesn’t address the issue at all, whether she is a mother or not. Solomon for the win.

  19. The Big Picture
    October 29, 2011 at 11:24 am

    I have to agree.

    Adams is vague on many issues.

    Solomon is a major contributor to contemporary progressive values. For 25 years, his prolific books and articles have made him an articulate candidate who nails all the issues and dispatches critics with grace.

    I have to wonder if Mitch has attended any of his numerous visits to H.Co?

  20. Anonymous
    October 29, 2011 at 11:28 am

    What’s wrong with Huffman?

  21. October 29, 2011 at 11:34 am

    Here is one Adams take on gay marriage, she says she “supports full marriage equality” for gay persons. In the video about 6:35 in.
    It is the Sonoma Young Democrats debate on her website.

    I’m not an expert on this issue but I do support equality so maybe some who are more up on this issue could watch the video and report back with their thoughts?

    have a peaceful day,

  22. October 29, 2011 at 11:38 am

    I got push polled by Huffman a couple of weeks ago. He is clearly worried about Solomon, not Adams. I was given about 5 opportunities to choose between Solomon and Huffman and I chose Solomon every time.

    Huffman’s main campaign point at the time was his record in “working with the Republicans to get things done.”

    Since all that has “gotten done” is more pain for the people in the last 20 years that’s not good enough. We need to CRUSH the Republican party. In the peaceful electoral sense as always.

    have a peaceful day,

  23. Anonymous
    October 29, 2011 at 11:48 am

    Looks like Huffman has my vote. I don’t do the socialist dance. If Adams were running for a health dept seat then I’d consider her credentials as a nurse practitioner but voting for a congressman based solely on their occupation, well that’s not even rational.

  24. October 29, 2011 at 12:10 pm

    Being an political insider like Huffman may be a liability in this election, its something Adams will have to contend with also. As crazy as Herman Cain is, he is right about this. At least for now it is the year of the Outsider. Acually a trend that started last cycle, but it is getting stronger.

    have a peaceful day,

  25. Anonymous
    October 29, 2011 at 12:56 pm

    A well-funded republican candidate is always clever to wait until the left-wingers have made their firm choices.

    Unlike republicans, liberals continually fail to coalesce behind a single candidate…Eureka, and Humb. Co. never tire of new examples where liberals loath to let go of petty personal grievances.

  26. Mitch
    October 29, 2011 at 1:15 pm

    The Big Picture,

    I am not against Solomon, or anyone else. I wish him well and I don’t doubt we agree on many issues.

    I would rather have a nurse in Congress than another lawyer. Bedpans, not words.

  27. Anonymous
    October 29, 2011 at 3:56 pm

    Oops. Please remove. Damn copy feature.

  28. Dan
    October 29, 2011 at 5:10 pm

    Walt@ 5:56, I listened to Susan Adams speak
    this morning, if I recall correctly she answered
    in the affirmative to your four concerns.
    She is no slouch and she is fully capable intellectually.

    “1. Will you work for Single Payer healthcare? (and do you have a plan?)

    2. Will you work for full legalization of Marijuana?

    3. Will you work to end corporate “personhood”?

    4. Will you work to close Guantanamo concentration camp, end the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (including pulling out mercenaries) and end drone strikes on sovereign nations with whom we are not at war?

    5. If not, why do you expect us to vote for you?

  29. October 29, 2011 at 5:43 pm

    I would like to hear Susan Adams condemn the DEA raids into California and demand that they cease any further enforcement of federal marijuana laws.

    I would ask her to sign a pledge to vote for single payer health care – and only single payer health care. We need a single payer pledge just like Norquist has his no tax pledge.

    I would ask her to promise to cut the Pentagon spending in half within 10 years.

    have a peaceful day,


  30. Anonymous
    October 29, 2011 at 8:31 pm

    Walt, Smoking pot and gitmo are yor priorities? Do you atually work for a living ?

  31. Walt
    October 30, 2011 at 5:43 am

    Not priorities in themselves, 8;31, but I can’t see paying any more tax dollars on a failed eradication policy, especially when it only props up the obscene prices. As for extralegal kidnapping and torture outside of our legal system (Gitmo). . .if you’re OK with that what’s the point of having a constitution? I do spel putty gud, tho. Mosly.

  32. Mitch
    October 30, 2011 at 7:48 am


    I would not ask any Congressional candidate to pledge to do things that cannot be done by any single Congressperson.

    Instead, I would look for a Congressional candidate who, by their behavior and sacrifices over a lengthy period, has demonstrated an affinity for the values I believe in, such as fairness, recognizing the value in lives outside of the United States, and recognizing the value of lives within the United States.

    I would also look for someone who demonstrated a personality able to best bring about those changes while working with people who emphasize different values: military strength, loyalty to friends, individual initiative.

    Anyone who promised to halve the pentagon budget within ten years would have my sympathy, but not my vote. I’d admire their goal, but I’d question their grip on reality and their understanding of our current situation as a sorely divided country.

  33. October 30, 2011 at 8:19 am

    Hi Mitch,

    If she weren’t a Democrat I would be tempted to support her. As I said yesterday I often meet individual Democrats who are simpatico and she is probably one of them. The problem is not individual Democrats or individual Democratic candidates, the problem is the Democratic Party.

    Although the rank and file of the party has lots of people in it who support single payer health care, the party leadership does not. The Democratic Party (and Barack Obama) sold us out to Big Pharma, Big Insurance and Big Health Care just like the Republicans did. They failed to fix the Medicare part D that is funneling billions of taxpayer dollars to Big Pharma. They are forcing millions of new custormers into the for profit health insurance scam. Big Insurance thanks you, Democratic Party. They have done nothing to address hospital costs, in fact the reliance on the failed insurance model will guarantee medical costs will continue to rise . HCA says thank you.

    On the global front, President Obama has expanded our global military footprint into Yemen, Pakistan, Libya, Colombia, Kenya and Somailia and now the Congo. The new austerity budget being proposed by the DEMOCRATS on the budget politburo cuts $3 Trillion from the budget but INCREASES the Pentagon budget!

    As far as a pledge goes, it has worked well for Norquist and I think we on the left should use the same tactic. We need to make these candidates pledge for single payer health care or nothing. That will free some one from the corporate party line they will be asked to support once they join the Club in DC.

    And personally, why should I support any party that wants to throw me in jail for using an herb? The answer is easy, I won’t.

    So the question is, no matter how good a candidate Adams may be, why should I send her to Washington if she is only going to vote the corporate party line?

    have a peaceful day,

  34. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 8:34 am

    Why do you think Adams (or Solomon) would vote the corporate party line, Bill? If somehow you were able to elect a Green, what could they accomplish without support or even the possibility of being named to important committees? Electing firebrands who make promises they can’t possibly fulfill doesn’t make any more sense than voting for candidates who have no chance of winning. Pulling the Democratic Party to the left would be easier than building a progressive party under our current system, especially with current events pulling the populace to the left.

  35. Mitch
    October 30, 2011 at 8:40 am


    As we both know, along with 91% or more of Americans, Congress is a cesspit, and the leadership of both main parties are inevitably filthy. This is not meant as an insult to these people, it is just an acknowledgement that if you are on top in a filthy system, you’ve done it by playing with filth. Even Thomas Friedman, leading pom pom boy for the filth class, says in today’s edition of The New York SuckupToPower, “Our Congress today is a forum for legalized bribery.”

    To blame any individual for being unable to change things at the national level is, in my opinion, silly. Adams has done more than speak up for single payer, she’s actually made changes in her community.

    As you say, many Democrats are sympatico. They’ve made personal decisions (we’ve made personal decisions — I think I’m still registered Democrat again, though I’m not sure) that the Democratic party, disgusting as it may be, is the likeliest route towards change for the better.

    The problem is NOT with Congress, the problem is with human nature. I truly believe that we could change things on a dime if we were willing to risk more of what we own, in both material wealth and emotional comfort. You are probably far ahead of me on that path.

    I don’t think you can change Congress by putting in people whose “big thing” is writing books and being nobler-than-thou. They keep getting in and nothing ever changes. Our current President, who I like and admire enormously, is example number one. You don’t think he’d like single-payer?! You don’t think he believes in the same things you believe?! I do, and I think he’s a very smart guy who simply realizes how constrained his movement is. I don’t think someone like Obama becomes President in order to suck up to Big Pharma and Wall Street — I think he’s someone who knows he is embarrassingly limited in his real ability to make change in the current American system.

    I think you might be able to change it by having a Congress with at least some members who have devoted their lives along a completely different path from the path of clever argument. To me, that would be more Susan Adamses.

  36. Dan
    October 30, 2011 at 8:42 am

    Bill’s right, single payer is fundamental. Dr.
    Susan Adams would agree with him. Susan also
    made it plain that after 30 years of nursing she
    understands that if we were to prohibit a drug
    on health grounds that drug would be alcohol.
    She also made it plain that she advocates withdrawal
    from the wars we are involved in. She is a grand-mother
    who will work to shape a world fit for her grand-children.

  37. Mitch
    October 30, 2011 at 8:46 am

    BTW, Dan is correct. Susan Adams holds a doctorate.

  38. October 30, 2011 at 8:50 am

    I am not being critical of Susan Adams just to be clear. The nurses in California through their unions especially have supported single payer health care consistently, so if Adams says she does I believe her.

    Will she take the single payer pledge, to vote only for single payer health care only despite the corruption of the highest levels of her party and the pressure that the corporatecrats will put on her?

    have a peaceful day,

  39. Mitch
  40. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 9:00 am

    Has anyone heard of or experienced Blue Shield requiring that their insured go to a large university setting for elective procedures for lower costs (for the insurance company) despite the inconvenience and much greater expense for patients and families? The financial drain this will place on our local hospitals and medical providers is going to hit hard and will probably result in the loss of more doctors.

  41. Mitch
    October 30, 2011 at 9:17 am

    If you go to lostcoastoutpost.com and jump to about 16 minutes in to their audio interview with Adams, you can here her respond to a question about the differences between her and Solomon:

    Long story short on policy differences: None. On temperament: “While I will fall on my sword for certain Democratic issues, I think that before you fall on your sword and say no, you have to try to find a way to get to yes. And you do that through conversation and trying to find common ground and to try to build collaboration and cooperative problem solving. And I’ve been able to demonstrate that in my community. I think it’s a skill I bring to the table.”

  42. October 30, 2011 at 9:21 am

    I am not being critical towards the left Democrats who choose to stay in the party and are trying to pull it left from inside. Although that is not my approach because I think the Democratic party is so corrupt at the highest levels that it is beyond reform I do respect their position. Somehow we have to find a way to work together at least on some things or the right wing will keep on winning elections.

    have a peaceful day,

  43. Walt
    October 30, 2011 at 9:21 am

    “Our current President, who I like and admire enormously, is example number one. You don’t think he’d like single-payer?! You don’t think he believes in the same things you believe?!”
    Mitch, I’m totally with Bill on this one. Gitmo was opened by executive fiat, it can be closed by executive fiat. The drone program has been radically expanded by Obama, as has the Afghanistan war. I think we need to judge these people on what they do, not what they say. There’s NO reason to expect anyone in the Democratic tent will start behaving themselves, given their track record. They’re totally crooked. When I bought property 15 years ago with an old house on it, the house was so full of bugs and so poorly built I decided to build a new one from scratch. That’s what we have to do with our political system.

  44. Mitch
    October 30, 2011 at 9:33 am


    I support the use of drones, because I fully believe that they are a way of killing people who would otherwise kill us, while reducing the risks to our soldiers and the civilian casualties in the populations in which dangerous terrorists hide. We just disagree about that.

    I don’t understand Guantanamo, and I think it is a true abomination. But I suspect that when President Obama looks at the bigger picture, he has reasons for not closing it that I would at least understand. It’s faith, and perhaps it’s misplaced.

    Building a political system from scratch might work. If you don’t like it when we kill terrorists now, you’ll probably be really depressed by the number of people who would probably get killed by that process. History doesn’t suggest the path is generally peaceful.

  45. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 9:36 am

    “On May 20, 2009, the United States Senate passed an amendment to the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009 (H.R. 2346) by a 90-6 vote to block funds needed for the transfer or release of prisoners held at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.”

    “On Jan 7, 2011, President Obama signed the 2011 Defense Authorization Bill which contains provisions preventing the transfer of Guantanamo prisoners to the mainland or to other foreign countries, and thus effectively stops the closure of the detention facility. However he strongly objected to the clauses and stated that he would work with Congress to oppose the measures. U.S. Secretary of Defense Gates said during a testimony before the US Senate Armed Services Committee on February 17, 2011: “The prospects for closing Guantanamo as best I can tell are very, very low given very broad opposition to doing that here in the Congress.”

  46. Walt
    October 30, 2011 at 9:42 am

    I’m suggesting building PARTIES from scratch, which, hopefully, wouldn’t get anybody killed.

    And Bill, poor Kucinich has been pulling on the party for years, and has bupkis to show for it.

  47. October 30, 2011 at 9:43 am

    Mitch a drone is a type of military weapon. Saying you support the use of drones is like saying you support the use of rifles.

    The real question is, do you support the use of drones in foriegn countries that we are not a war with, and without a Congressional declaration of war? Do you support the use of drones domestically? Maybe if you think about it you will change your mind.

    have a peaceful day,

  48. Walt
    October 30, 2011 at 9:45 am

    And PJ, I once interviewed a lawyer who Congress forbid the Navy Dept to pay in the Appropriations Bill of 1952. He said the Navy paid him cash, so a dam on the Santa Margarita River was never built. It CAN be done.

  49. Mitch
    October 30, 2011 at 9:50 am


    Good luck. If your new party takes positions to the left of the current Democratic position, I’m curious what makes you think it will gain more traction than the existing Democratic party. How well have the Greens done nationally?

    Never say never, but you might find that your shiny new party falls into one of two traps: it might remain shiny and new and never elect a soul, or it might get a bit tarnished by contact with an election.

  50. October 30, 2011 at 9:51 am

    The prisoners in Gitmo have not been convicted of any crimes, they have been there uncharged for years now. The idea that they must be transferred to prisons in the US is a right wing Republcan meme. They could simply be set free and flown to the destination of their choice.

    It has been proven that the vast majority of inmates at Gitmo were not terrorists but simply people who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. It is simple humanity that requires this war crime be brought to an end.

    have a peaceful day,

  51. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 9:51 am

    How would cash get around the provision forbidding the release or transfer of GITMO inmates, Walt?

  52. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 9:54 am

    The vast majority of inmates have been released or transferred to their home countries, Bill. GITMO’s inmate population today is 171.

  53. Mitch
    October 30, 2011 at 9:55 am


    We are there. Should we be there? No. Do we want to get out? Yes. Given that we are there, should we use the weaponry likely to cause the least death? I think so.

    If I were the parent of a soldier who got killed in Afghanistan, I’d be pretty angry we’re still there. But if I found out that my child died because he had to go door to door where a drone could have killed the “enemy” instead, I’d want to kill the Commander in Chief. Arguments that we didn’t want drone use to spread dometically would have little effect on my attitude.

    Got to say bye now.

  54. October 30, 2011 at 9:56 am

    Taking a postion “left” of the Democratic Party is easy. The Democratic party is a nationalist right-center party that is totally in bed with the national security state, the Patriot Act, the military industrial complex and the prison lobby and big business in general.

    have a peaceful day,

  55. October 30, 2011 at 10:07 am

    Walt, I agree that the only viable path is a new party, and we will haver to build it. I am trying to express the reasons why we need to abandon the Democratic Party while at the same time not alienating those left Democrats who are choosing to stay in and reform it. I will only say that I think they are wrong but I will respect their choice and hope they will respect mine. The bottom line is that the fascist Republicans must be defeated, and to do that independent leftists and left Democrats must find some way to get along. I am trying.

    have a peaceful day,

  56. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 10:14 am

    But Democratic voters have the power to change that, Bill. We can demand leaders who don’t accept corporate contributions and fund and work for those candidates. Changing the body changes the leadership. Most people are finally realizing that allowing corporations to fund our political system inevitably leads to corruption and this will be a growing issue in coming elections. Congress (both parties) have record low approval ratings because they are doing the bidding of corporations against the best interests of their constituents. That doesn’t mean that every representative is corrupt, just enough of them. We have been lulled by consumerism and cheap entertainment into forgetting our civic responsibility to be informed. A shameful number of people don’t even bother to vote. It would be hard to make the case that this isn’t the political system an apathetic populace deserves.

  57. October 30, 2011 at 10:17 am

    If Adams (or Solomon or Huffman for that matter) wants to sign the Single Payer Pledge she can go to http://urlet.com/oslo.storage and make a comment. It’s easy.

    have a peaceful day,

  58. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 10:23 am

    So Bill, if there was a proposal to add a public option which would allow people to opt into the Medicare system, you would want your representative to vote against it?

  59. October 30, 2011 at 10:26 am

    Here’s a list of candidates for H2, I think maybe with the open primary system the run off might be Dem vs. Dem. Interesting to see how it plays out. This will be the first election using the open primary system, most pundits think it will result in more centrist candidates. Also interesting is that most parties including the smaller ones opposed the open primary. All the candidates are Dems except for one R, although there is at least one former Green.

    have a peaceful day,

    District 2:
    [ Lynn Woolsey (D)* – Retiring in 2012. ]
    Susan Adams (D) – Marin County Supervisor & Maternity Clinical Researcher
    Banafsheh Akhlaghi (D) – Attorney & Human Rights Activist
    Andy Caffrey (D) – Videographer, US Green Party Co-Founder & Environmental Activist
    William Courtney (D) – Physician & Cannabis Medical Consultant
    Jared Huffman (D) – State Assemblyman, Ex-Marin Municipal Water District Board President & Attorney
    Stacey Lawson (D) – Ex-Technology Executive, Educator & Progressive Activist
    Tiffany Renee (D) – Petaluma City Councilwoman & Environmental Activist
    Norman Solomon (D) – Author & Progressive Activist
    Shirlee Zane (D) – Sonoma County Supervisor & Non-Profit Group CEO
    Dan Roberts (R) – Investment Firm Owner & Disabled Vietnam War Veteran

  60. October 30, 2011 at 10:41 am

    PJ that’s a tough question but a fair one.

    Medicare is single payer health care so technically if my representative voted to extend it to everyone I don’t think that would violate the single payer pledge, although I certainly would consider it incrementalism.

    Let us remember that Medicare does not provide any dental care or vision care at all, so in that sense it is an incomplete and inadequate program. Also there is the problem that many doctors simply won’t take medicare, and if they do they impose very large co pays.

    So it is time to ask, would a cop or a nurse or a prison guard or an auto worker (the core union constituency of the Democratic Party) be happy with Medicare as their sole means for health care? If so then I say go for it. Medicare for all.

    And there is the problem of medication. Medicare part D was a Republcan scam. It was designed from the get-go to do several things. Throw a bone to the aged who need drugs to survive, yes, but not a very good donut holed one. Boost profits for Big Pharma, yes, at the expense of billions of $ of taxpayer money. Boost profits for Big Insurance, yes as it requires you to buy insurance to participate in part D. And finally the bottom line for the Repubs, part D is literally busting the Medicare program, which is what the Repubs want to do. It is the single biggest spending bill ever passed by the Congress, and it was passed by Republicans without “being paid for.”

    So if my rep voted to extend Medicare to all without fixing part D then I would consider that a violatiion of the single payer pledge.

    Think back to 2008 when the Dems controlled the House, the Senate and the White House. If they had simply fixed part D, then the budget would be hundreds of billions more towards the black and people would have much cheaper pharmaceuticals. Instead they sold out.

    have a peaceful day,

  61. Walt
    October 30, 2011 at 10:48 am

    Nailed it, Bill.

  62. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 11:07 am

    That’s why I think pledges are a bad idea, Bill. Single payer isn’t the same as a public option whether that is Medicare without D or another government administered program. Allowing people to opt into Medicare would be a progressive step toward single payer, but a pledge to vote no on anything but single payer would block it.

    A correction to your statement above: Doctors who accept Medicare (most do) don’t impose any co-pays nor would it be legal for them to do so. The amount they can bill is set by Medicare and they can’t bill patients for more than Medicare allows. Co-pays or deductibles are set by Medicare or insurance company policies, not doctors or hospitals.

  63. October 30, 2011 at 11:27 am

    Well when the Democrats offer up the solution “Medicare for All” do they mean really everyone will be on Medicare or do they just mean the rest of us who aren’t either rich Republcans or entitled union members with really nice health care benefits?

    No, of course I am not suggesting a race to the bottom. But if we are going to suggest “Medicare for all” as a solution then Medicare should be acceptable for all right?

    I think realistically Medicare will have to be substantially improved before most people who have a choice will accept it as their primary means of health care.

    have a peaceful day,

  64. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 11:36 am

    No Bill, my example was if they allowed, but didn’t coerce, anyone who wanted to opt into Medicare as a public option included in the current health care laws. If everyone was required to have Medicare then it would be single payer.

  65. October 30, 2011 at 11:38 am

    Federal officials approve reductions to Medi-Cal
    Staff Reports
    Posted: 10/28/2011 06:17:26 PM PDT
    Updated: 10/28/2011 09:05:49 PM PDT


    The federal government has approved a state proposal to reduce Medi-Cal provider reimbursements by 10 percent and make other cuts to the federal health insurance program for the poor and disabled.

    The cuts approved this week by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services include a 10 percent reduction to payments for outpatient services for doctors, clinics, optometrists, dental services, medical equipment and pharmacy.

    Medi-Cal, California’s Medicaid program, provides health insurance and long-term coverage to the state’s low-income children, their parents, elderly, and disabled people.

    Department of Health Care Services Director Toby Douglas says California will save $623 million in general fund money through the “painful but necessary reductions.”

    But the cuts could also lead to medical practices struggling to stay open or doctors being unable to see Medi-Cal patients in the Inland Empire, said Jim Peterson, executive director of San Bernardino County Medical Society.

    “As a county medical society along with (California Medical Association), we’re disappointed that this position was taken,” Peterson said.

    “In San Bernardino County and the Inland Empire, overall, there’s already a severe shortage of primary care physicians, which just adds to the backlog of anybody trying to get in to see a doctor.”

    Many doctors have stopped accepting Medi-Cal patients because the reimbursements don’t meet the cost of overhead and supplies to treat those patients.
    Carol S. Havens, president of the California Academy of Family Physicians, called the cuts “an outrage.”

    “Family physicians’ consciences have dictated to them that they care for Medi-Cal patients even though doctors have been paid less than it costs to provide this care, for many years,” Havens said.

    “As a result, patients’ access to care has long been diminishing. This further 10 percent reduction will make it even more challenging to care for this vulnerable population.

    Doctors’ efforts to maintain or improve payments are not inspired by greed, but are intended to protect patient access to quality care, said Ted Mazer, a CMA spokesman.

    If the cuts go through, Mazer predicts emergency rooms will be flooded with Medi-Cal patients seeking primary care services because they can’t find primary doctors willing to see them. That will cause reduced access to vital, speedy care for all patients, he said.

    “It’s not good. You know that. My answer to that is that it’s a disaster to the uninsured,” said Dev GnanaDev, medical director and chief of surgery at Arrowhead Regional Medical Center in Colton and a past president of California Medical Association.

    “It will further deteriorate and … less than half of the doctors are seeing medical patients. That’s going to be less.”

    Anthony Wright, executive director of Health Access California, agreed that the cuts will affect care for millions of Californians, but he identified a silver-lining in the announcement.

    Some of the state’s proposed cuts were rejected by the federal government, including 10 percent cuts to services for children, home health services and other facilities. Other cuts to long-term care facilities are still under review.

    The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services also has yet to rule on Gov. Jerry Brown’s requests to require Medi-Cal patients to make $5 copayments for physician visits, $50 for emergency room visits and limit most beneficiaries to seven doctor visits a year.

    The governor says those changes would save the state more than $550 million, but doctors say it’s unlikely that low-income families will be able to pay the co-payments, which will mean more financial burden for their practices.

    Staff writer Will Bigham and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

  66. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 11:52 am

    That’s an outrage, Bill. So anyone who makes so little that they qualify for Medi-Cal can’t see a doctor because they don’t have the money for the co-pay even if they could find a doctor who will accept Medi-Cal insurance. I know that doctors have been treating Medi-Cal patients at a loss since the program’s beginning and they have steadily shaved payments over the years, depending on provider’s dedication to their profession and good hearts to make up the increasing shortfall. The damage they are doing to medical practices and hospitals will impact us all regardless what kind of insurance we have or how rich we are. The people who have been so terrified of govt run health care should be happy with the corporate run health care being imposed upon us without our consent. They can’t outsource health care to cheaper countries, but they can use economy of scale and force their subscribers to utilize major health centers while local communities lose the necessary health care dollars to keep their own systems adequate, sucking even more local money out with a corresponding loss of jobs.

  67. October 30, 2011 at 11:54 am

    I agree. An outrage.

    have a peaceful day,

  68. October 30, 2011 at 12:06 pm

    PJ, maybe you know something I don’t but I have Medicare and when I go to the doctor or hospital I get charged a 20% co pay. In that sense Medicare is ok catastrophic insurance but it is not terribly affordable when a hospital stay is thousands of dollars a day. A doctor visit costs me $20 out of pocket.

    Plus of course people need to remember Medicare is not free. I pay over a hundred a month in premiums. Yes I know that peoples private health insurance costs more, but nevertheless Medicare isnt a free ride.

    I am not arguing with you on this one, this is my personal experience. Maybe you are thinking of people who have Medicare Advantage, that for profit medicare supplement?

    “A correction to your statement above: Doctors who accept Medicare (most do) don’t impose any co-pays nor would it be legal for them to do so. The amount they can bill is set by Medicare and they can’t bill patients for more than Medicare allows. Co-pays or deductibles are set by Medicare or insurance company policies, not doctors or hospitals.”

    have a peaceful day,

  69. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 12:53 pm

    I didn’t say they don’t collect co-pays, Bill. But it is Medicare who sets the rules, not the provider. Your co-pay is part of the price Medicare allows providers to charge, not in addition to. Lots of private insurances have co-pays as well. The insurance industry likes them because they reduce their subscribers’ use of medical care by making patients share some of the cost.

  70. October 30, 2011 at 1:01 pm

    Wow the Medi-Cal cuts referred to in the article above are going to be RETROACTIVE from June 1. So all you providers get out your spreadsheets you “misoverestimated” your cash flow for the last five months. WOW.

    “The rate cuts are retroactive to services provided since June 1, said state Department of Health Care Services spokesman Norman Williams.”

    Read more: http://www.sacbee.com/2011/10/28/4012965/obama-administration-oks-cuts.html#ixzz1cIT6lRf4

  71. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 1:03 pm

    Let me give you an example Bill. If you go to the doctor to get your blood pressure checked, there is a set price the doctor can bill for the service. If his usual bill for a cash patient for the same service was $50, Medicare would probably only allow $30. With your co-pay of $20, Medicare would pay $10 and the doctor wouldn’t get paid the other $20. Expecting him to also forego the $20 co-pay seems unreasonable.

  72. October 30, 2011 at 1:09 pm

    Try again please that made no sense to me. Really. I understood it up through “with your copay of 20”


  73. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 1:09 pm

    And on that subject, why do we expect doctors to receive less than their usual charges for the poor, but we don’t expect grocers and landlords or anyone else to?

  74. October 30, 2011 at 1:12 pm

    If the doctor simply accepted what Medicare offered then I would get treatment and would not have to pay the copay, correct? So the problem is that medicare is not paying the doctors enough?

    have a peaceful day,

  75. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 1:13 pm

    If Medicare allows $30 for your doctor’s visit and you have a $20 co-pay, Medicare pays $10 of the cost of your visit. The doctor doesn’t get paid any more than what Medicare allows no matter what his usual charges are. If he doesn’t collect the $20 co-pay from you, he only gets the $10 from Medicare. Of course, these prices are in no way meant to be accurate because I don’t know what a quick office visit costs today.

  76. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 1:18 pm

    And no, Bill, Medicare is not paying the doctors enough. Lots of them have had to restrict the number of Medicare appointments and procedures they can do each month to remain profitable.

  77. October 30, 2011 at 1:20 pm

    If Medicare allows $30 for a doctors visit then the doctor will get $30 no matter how much I co pay is that not correct? I mean if the cash price visit is $37.50 (you used 50) and Medicare pays 80% then the doc will get $30. (80% of 37.50) He will get that whether I pay any copay or not. Right? Or am I missing something?


  78. October 30, 2011 at 1:21 pm

    PJ, so you seem to be agreeing with me that doctors who take Medicare are hard to find?

    have a peaceful day,

  79. October 30, 2011 at 1:23 pm

    If doctors are not getting paid enough and the Obama and Governor Brown are cutting payments to doctors what can we conclude?

    have a peaceful day,

  80. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 1:26 pm

    No, that is not correct. Medicare will deduct your co-pay from the amount they allow, regardless what that is. Medicare doesn’t pay 80% of what the doctor usually charges. They pay 80% of what they allow which isn’t related to his cash price but their own fee schedule. If Dr. A charged $50 and Dr. B charged $60, Medicare would pay them the exact amount.

  81. October 30, 2011 at 1:27 pm

    Thanks for the explanation PJ

    have a peaceful day,

  82. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 1:31 pm

    And, I should add, Dr A’s patient and Dr. B’s patient would have the same exact amount of personal responsibility for their share of cost. Dr. B would just be writing off $10 more than Dr. A.

  83. Plain Jane
    October 30, 2011 at 1:38 pm

    the sun is out and so am I.

  84. Anonymous
    October 30, 2011 at 2:59 pm

    Good grief, single payer health plan means somebody else payer health plan. Once again folks, there is no money, 15 trillion federal debt with no end in sight. The debt for each citizen is over $47,000 and for each taxpayer is over $132,000. That does not count the unfunded liabilities.

  85. Pete's A Man
    October 30, 2011 at 3:57 pm

    fifteen TRILLION? GOOD GRIEF! Let’s declare national bankruptcy like Arkley did. Fuck the creditors. America can go all LLC on their asses! Time to start over,

    I call it my “nein, nein, nein” plan.

  86. Dan
    October 31, 2011 at 1:37 pm

    FOX News-ly
    “…..there is no money,” (for single-payer) 2:59

    That is silly. We know through experience that
    to ignore health services is much more expensive in the long-term,
    than to provide care for all.

    Healthcare is not discretionary.

  87. Chain of Fools
    November 2, 2011 at 11:54 am

    It’s another desperate gamble to win the working-class vote, by pitting the female, working-class nurse, mother of a vet…against the white, male, privileged lawyer….when the working-classes have been avoiding the poles for decades in astounding numbers!

    Despite an era in America that rivals its worst, the “pragmatic” Dem-machine backs another “electable” candidate who can appeal to their opponents, while the candidate who has been right-all-along (Solomon) who’s mastery of the issues is worthy of the presidency, and could conceivably motivate the 50% of voters who never participate, must combat those on the left for whom his eloquence has armed all along.

  88. Mitch
    November 2, 2011 at 11:58 am

    Interesting theory, CoF. You do understand that the Democratic machine is backing attorney Jared Huffman, don’t you?

  89. Anonymous
    November 3, 2011 at 12:57 am

    Yes, I do, and it changes nothing in my comment.

    Party honchos are backing Huffman, while a surprising number of “liberal-dems” are taking the usual risk on Adams’ working-class credentials….when the working-class isn’t participating! (This is the self-defeating democratic strategy that forces candidates to pander to the right, making them indistinguishable to discouraged citizens that don’t vote).

    God forbid that Solomon, who is the most articulate orator for progressive values, who understands how to speak the simple truth to voters, could actually rally more voter participation.

    NOTE: If Bill, and some of the others on this blog had a regular column, or actual debate-forum in a community newspaper, I would subscribe again.

  90. Chain of Fools
    November 3, 2011 at 12:58 am

    12:57 was me!

  91. Walt
    November 3, 2011 at 5:23 am

    I know it’s a crazy idea, but what if Bill, Jane, Mitch and a couple of others were to have a real, sit-down meeting to see if they could hash out their differences (which aren’t really that huge, after all). There’s something about this medium that makes it too easy to speak in logic mcnuggets and GFYs. Then there are the trolls. . . Surely if the Right can cabalize, the Left could, too.

  92. November 3, 2011 at 6:39 am

    Walt I like your sentiment and I do think the left has to cooperate with each other to accomplish common goals.

    I am just not sure that the differences can be “hashed out.” This is because the left is inherently diverse as opposed to the fascist right. This is a strength as well, not just a hindrance.

    But we can start by someone like me (an independent leftist) respecting the choice of left Democrats to stay in their party and they can respect my choice to stay outside the party and maybe we can work togiether. We must or we will lose.

    have a peaceful day,

  93. Mitch
    November 3, 2011 at 6:59 am


    I don’t really object to such a meeting, but I don’t see what particular value it would have, except perhaps that it would be interesting for the participants.

    Differences are inevitable, and on the center-to-left end of the spectrum they are generally a result not so much of differing values but of differing life experiences leading to different beliefs about strategies and tactics. When multiple people are running for an office that only one can occupy, it’s not surprising that good people will have different preferences as to who is the best choice.


    I think you misunderstand my reasons for supporting Adams. It’s not an attempt to “wow the working class.” I wouldn’t support a construction worker just because they were a construction worker, working class or not. I want people in Congress who have the values and approaches I associate with those who enter nursing as a profession — an understanding of sickness and vulnerability, and a demonstrated willingness to do unglamorous tasks associated with caring for those who are sick and vulnerable.

    That’s a VERY different thing than writing books and giving speeches.

    And Adams is no intellectual slouch. She has a doctorate and is a professor in the UC system. And she’s no political slouch either — she has demonstrated her electability by winning her seat on the Marin Board of Supes, and she has demonstrated that, once in office, she is able to make good projects happen.

    As I’ve said, I wish Solomon and other candidates well. It’s very nice to have multiple candidates I could happily get behind.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s