Todd Akin

The GOP senate wannabes had a debate recently. Actually, I take that back. TWO of the THREE GOP senate wannabes had a debate recently since John Brunner chickened out of the debate, apparently scared to answer the questions Missourians have. This, of course, after agreeing to debates, even calling for debates, and then backing out. Bwwaaaaaak bwak bwak bwak bwaaaaaaaak. But I digress...

Sarah Steelman and Todd Akin both managed to show up, but their answers were downright frightening, particularly regarding Obamacare. Both were asked what should happen to a 28 year old man who has the ability to purchase health insurance but decides not to - these sorts of folks are often referred to as the "Young Invincibles" - and is then diagnosed with cancer.

Both Steelman and Akin both demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of what Obamacare actually does, like ensuring that insurance companies must justify rate hikes, prohibiting annual or lifetime limits on needed care, ending denials based on preexisting conditions, and many, many others policies. Of course, as was to be expected, both Steelman and Akin rolled out the fear mongering, repeatedly debunked, tea party talking points which boil down to guvment health care is baaaaaaaaaad which, really, is best left to expert fear-mongerer in chief, Ed Martin.

But back to the debate, Steelman talks about affordability and accessibility as if Obamacare doesn't address either - which it does - and talks about door knocking business people. Indulge me here for a minute: when I go door knocking for candidates or issues, I don't door knock business people, I door knock in neighborhoods where families and my neighbors live. What in the world is Steelman doing door knocking and only talking to business people? Does she ever have conversations with a working Missourian who's boss, maybe a small business owner, has now been able to provide his employees with healthcare coverage because of the small business tax credits made available by Obamcare? Has Steelman had a conversation with the mother down the road who now has access to healthcare that she was previously denied because she had a breast cancer scare but now that insurance companies are prohibited from denying healthcare for preexisting conditions she can now rest easy knowing that she can get the care she needs and watch her children grow up? Or does she only talk with business people? Just curious.

Anyway, let's debunk the "let's-sell-insurance-across-state-lines" idea right here and now. Better yet, I'll let Ezra Klein of the Washington Post do it:

Selling insurance across state lines: A terrible, no good, very bad health-care idea

Insurance is currently regulated by states. California, for instance, says all insurers have to cover treatments for lead poisoning, while other states let insurers decide whether to cover lead poisoning, and leaves lead poisoning coverage -- or its absence -- as a surprise for customers who find that they have lead poisoning. Here's a list (pdf) of which states mandate which treatments.

This past summer, Rep Akin failed time and time again to meet with constituents concerned about his votes on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

Yesterday, Akin and fellow wannabe Senator Sarah Steelman had their first formal debate. Third man in John Brunner was "unable" to attend.

You can listen to the hour-long debate here. 

Highlights from the coverage:

If a 28 year old man without health insurance gets cancer, Steelman sure "hopes somebody takes care of him".

Also, for the first time in modern history, a Conservative has used the analogy that health insurance is "just like car insurance", which would probably make the folks over at Fox news cringe.

On taxes, Steelman's platform seems a bit confusing typical (emphasis added):

"What I think we need to do is close loopholes, broaden the base and push the income tax rate down as far as we possibly can, both on individual and corporate (taxes) because we're not competitive worldwide," said Steelman, adding she would also favor cutting capital gains taxes.

So yesterday we wrote about John Brunner deciding to skip the first debate to be held for the GOP Senate wannabes, leaving it to Sarah Steelman and Todd Akin to appear on KTRS.

Today we find out that not only has Brunner decided to skip the first debate, but he's been given a second chance to debate in January, this time in Branson on the 30th, and he's chickening out of that one, too!

A spokesman for the 3^rd likely candidate, St. Louis businessman John Brunner, has said he is unable to commit at this time, saying the campaign’s original verbal commitment to Earls Family Broadcasting last November was to a debate, not to a specific date.

A debate in GOP-friendly Branson and Brunner can't commit to being in attendance.  Whatcha hiding, John?  Scared to answer questions about being a "job creator" who actually laid a bunch of workers off while getting rich? Terrified of questions about your refusal to answer other questions about the Ryan plan to privatize Medicare?

If I were scheduling/hosting debates, I'd go ahead and ask Brunner all the questions I had, and then play this in leiu of any actual answers:

Is John Brunner ever going to step out of the shadows of his handlers and show up to answer the questions voters have or participate in a debate?  Less than a month ago, Brunner sent Sarah Steelman and Todd Akin a letter requesting debates ASAP, then quickly changed course and decided not to be a part of the debates.  Then wanted debates.  Then didn't want to debate.

I'll be honest, there have been so many switcheroos that I can't even keep track!

The fact of the matter is that John Brunner is just too chicken to debate. Bwwwwak!

Earlier today, the first GOP Senate debate was announced:

First GOP debate set for Senate contenders, but without Brunner

The first debate among Missouri Republican contenders for the U.S. Senate is set for next week—Tuesday, Jan. 10, at 9 a.m. and carried live on KRTS Radio (550am) and KTRS.com

What is Brunner so afraid of? Why is it so hard to give answers to direct questions from voters? What is Brunner trying to hide?

From the GOP's Washington Times: "A handful of Republicans are running against first-term Sen. Robert P. Casey Jr. in Pennsylvania, but there are no real standouts, Mr. Stuart Rothenberg said. The same can be said of Missouri, where a number of GOP candidates are vying for a chance to take out a weakened freshman Sen. Claire McCaskill."

via @PoliticMo 

As Christmas time approaches, it appears many in Congress may indeed receive that well-deserved lump of coal. Whether it’s protecting millionaires from having to pay taxes or cutting the unemployment lifeline for jobless workers, those like Rep. Todd Akin must truly be into the taking rather than the giving spirit of Christmas.

Unfortunately our dear friend Todd Akin has not given Missouri families an opportunity to sing this holiday season with his many questionable and regretful decisions this past year.

With no further delay, I present the “12 Days of Akin” holiday carol, sure to warm the hearts of the many without a payroll tax cut or at risk of losing their jobless benefits this year.

“The 12 Days of Akin” …

Earlier today, House republicans refused to extend the payroll tax cut for 160 million working Americans.  Included in the Senate version of the bill, which they rejected, was an extension of unemployment benefits, but with the failure of the House to pass the bill, these jobless workers - 33,400 in Missouri alone - will receive no extension come January 1.

With all the doom and gloom in the economy and the fact that the holiday season is upon us, you'd think our elected officials in Washington would take every opportunity to work to solve the economic crisis our nation is currently enduring.

But no.  Rep. Todd Akin prefers to see this as an opportunity to continue his baseless attacks on workers:

Akin also said he wants to sit down with the Senate to continue pressing for the House-drawn provision that would allow states to perform drug tests as a condition for receiving unemployment.

"We don't really want our unemployment benefits going for drugs because people on drugs aren't easily employed," he said.

This afternoon, in a purely political move, House republicans voted to hike taxes on 160 million working Americans effective January 1 by rejecting the Senate's extension of the payroll tax cut.

By a final vote of 229 - 113, including Rep. Akin, Rep. Emerson, Rep. Graves, Rep. Hartzler, Rep. Long, and Rep. Luetkemeyer, republicans violated their pledge of not raising taxes.

[UPDATE: We've received an explanation from Brunner himself on his "debate switcheroo." Click here to view.]

Is John Brunner trying to compete with Mittens on how many times one man can flip-flop on a single topic? This certainly seems to be the case when it comes to whether or not John Brunner will participate in a debate on the issues with his fellow candidates for the GOP nomination for Senate here in Missouri.  Unfortunately, just like pretty much everything else, Brunner can't commit.

Back in October, Sarah Steelman and Todd Akin were both in negotiations to participate in a debate pulled together by KCUR, but Brunner, clearly not ready for primetime, refused to engage.

Missouri Jobs with Justice held their two "Scrooge of the Year" Elections in St. Louis and Kansas City recently.

In St. Louis, Hall-of-Famed Chessmaster Billionaire Lobbyist Rex Sinquefield got the most votes and was elected Scrooge of the year. This seems fitting that the guy who regularly buys politicians and laws wins an election where 1$ = 1 vote.

A certain someone is certainly achin' for some answers in Wildwood these days.  After saying, "people have to have an incentive to try and find a job, and when those benefits expire, there's a whole lot more pressure to really find something," it seems that Rep. Todd Akin is in need of some facts with regards to unemployment benefits.

Let's cut to the chase, if unemployment benefits aren't extended, Missouri's communities will lose over $8 million every week Congress doesn't pass an extension, further harming the state and local economies.

Additionally, I'm sure that the 33,400 Missourians who are facing a bleak and unthinkable future if Congress fails to act and extend unemployment would like Akin to hear their stories and get the facts.

From ThinkProgress:

A new study from Congress’ Joint Economic Committee (JEC) debunks the prevailing conservative notion that Unemployment Insurance (UI) dissuades people from looking for a job. “On the contrary,” the report finds, “beneficiaries of federal UI benefits have spent more time searching for work than those who were ineligible for UI benefits.” “In fact, since Congress enacted federal unemployment benefits, time spent looking for a job has tripled among the long?term unemployed who are out of work as a result of job loss,” the report adds.

Emphasis added.

Shocking new data from the census shows that 1 in 2 Americans are poor or low-income. 

"The reality is that prospects for the poor and the near poor are dismal," [Sheldon Danziger, a University of Michigan public policy professor who specializes in poverty] said. "If Congress and the states make further cuts, we can expect the number of poor and low-income families to rise for the next several years."

Of course, if you ask a conservative think tank what they think about rising inequity and increasing numbers of poor and low-income people, he'll give you a well rehearsed talking point akin to pull-harder-on-your-bootstraps:

"There's no doubt the recession has thrown a lot of people out of work and incomes have fallen," Rector said. "As we come out of recession, it will be important that these programs promote self-sufficiency rather than dependence and encourage people to look for work."

As an aside, that sounds A LOT like a one Rep. Todd Akin's tone deaf remark recently regarding the payroll tax break for working families where he said, "people have to have an incentive to try and find a job, and when those benefits expire, there's a whole lot more pressure to really find something."

For the record, a significant number of those in need of assistance DO have jobs, Mr Rector and Mr Akin:

Who knew the "Most Unpopular Freshman" Senator Roy Blunt could finagle his way into being elected to a leadership position in the Republican Conference, 25-22?

As we wrote earlier, Missouri's highest ranking republican got there with absolutely no help from Senate hopefuls Todd Akin, John Brunner and Sarah Steelman - all of whom took a pass on endorsing consumate Washington insider, Blunt.

Still no word on whether or not Akin, Brunner or Steelman have congratulated Blunt. 

Update: The consumate Washington insider won the Conference Vice Chairman job without tea party support. 

Must-listen stuff from KTRS' McGraw Millhaven show this morning from Sen. Claire McCaskill on the lack of support for Roy Blunt's GOP Senate leadership bid from John Brunner, Sarah Steelman and Todd Akin. 

Last week, GOP Senate hopeful John Brunner finally joined his primary rivals, Todd Akin and Sarah Steelman, in calling for frequent debates in their race for the Republican nomination.

And yet, a week later, there's nary a peep out of the rivals about when these concensus debates will begin.

Maybe it's time for the moderators-in-waiting in the press corps to push them for a date certain.

Meanwhile, the GOP candidiates for President just completed their 17th debate....

Via @RoyTemple

Senator Roy Blunt would really like to be the next Senate Republican Conference Vice Chair, but the guy can't even get support at home.  Later today, during the weekly Republican Conference Lunch, Blunt will face off with ultra-conservative Ron Johnson of Wisconsin who has support from other Tea Party darlings such as Marco Rubio of Florida, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Jim DeMint of South Carolina, as well as the two republicans running to join Johnson in the senate primary race in Wisconsin.

One would think, given that they would all like to be Missouri's next senator and be able to serve with Blunt, that Todd Akin, John Brunner and Sarah Steelman would announce their support of the hometown guy Blunt, but each one of them have taken a pass on any endorsement.

From PoliticMo:

• Akin: A spokesman for Akin said he had “no comment” on Blunt’s election.
• Brunner: “Not one person has mentioned they are concerned about a leadership election in Washington where nobody running for U.S. Senate in Missouri has a vote.”
• Steelman: A spokesman for Steelman said her campaign “hasn’t even paid attention to it.”

Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the man they'd all like to join in the Senate.

Perhaps this lack of support from fellow republican senators and the folks back home is further indicative of Blunt's current title of "Most Unpopular Freshman."  From the sounds of it, his standing hasn't improved much.

This afternoon, at Rep. Todd Akin's office in Ballwin, clergy, community leaders, unemployed constituents and concerned working families held a press conference as well as prayed for the extension of unemployment insurance.

“Without unemployment insurance, I wouldn’t be able to keep food on the table or a roof over my family’s head,” said Dorothy Phillips, a long-term jobless worker trying to find work, “and it worries me to think about what would happen to Missouri if Congress doesn’t act now to help struggling families.”

Akin's insensetive and tone-deaf comments in the past regarding Unemployment Insurance, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid have led to a large nuber of citizens and organizations asking for meetings with the congressman over the last year, even holding town halls and inviting Akin to attend as well as visiting Akin's own office. This event was to ask Rep. Akin to support the extension ot unemployment benefits.  If the extension isn't approved, 33,400 Missourians will lose their benefits in January and thousands more will lose benefits as their unemployment runs out.  The impact on these workers' families, support networks as well as the Missouri economy is one that could be avoided if Rep. Akin would speak up for his constituents instead of consistently voting to protect the wealthiest 1% from paying their fair share.

Across the country, two million working Americans will lose their benefits, including 33,400 Missourians in January, and 6 million in all of 2012 if an extension is not approved.

Unsurprisingly, Akin wasn't able to attend the meeting, but we can only guess that if he'd been there, he would have told his own constituents that he is in favor of privatizing Social Security and Medicare, and is opposed to any extension of Unemployment, saying, "I think there's a certain point where people have to have an incentive to try and find a job, and when those benefits expire, there's a whole lot more pressure to really find something."

Akin should be supporting the programs that his constituents depend on to survive, but unfortanately, his refusal to listen and his contiued radical statements surprise no one.

Does John Brunner have substantive answers about any substantive issues yet?  Check out this glorious non-answer in the News-Leader to a direct question about the House GOP plan to eliminate Medicare as we know it: 

Q: Would you support transforming Medicare into a voucher program in which seniors purchase insurance in the private market, instead of the current government program, as proposed by House GOP Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis.?

Akin: Yes, he is on record supporting and voting for the Ryan plan.

Brunner: "What I am looking at is, can you give people a choice -- the Ryan plan or keep their current program? Or even a third option? ... Or combinations of those plans to bring some choice, so you can have that incentive to lower costs?"

Steelman: "The cost of living (increase) that's factored into the (voucher proposal) each year is different, and I'm afraid it wouldn't cover the cost of increasing health costs from year to year... And then I also worry about how, if you have that age population, if you can actually get reasonably priced insurance. It's difficult to insure the senior population" in the private market.

On KTRS yesterday (FF to ~7:00), Former Sen. John Danforth had some choice words in describing his fellow republicans, especially those running for president:

I’ve been watching some of these republican debates and they’re just terrible. Terrible.  How many have they had?  Something like nine, ten, something like that, it seems like every week there’s a debate and, uh, and it’s embarrassing for me as a republican to watch this stuff.

Tell us, sir, what exactly has been so embarrassing about your fellow republicans?

What have been the big applause lines in these debates? Well, a statement that the governor of Texas is responsible for killing 234 people on death row.  Or that we favor torture. Or that we’re creating a fence on the Mexican border that electrocutes people when they try to cross it. Or when people show up at the emergency room at hospitals and they’re not insured don’t treat them. And that, I mean these are the big applause lines, people just hoop and holler when they hear all that.

Yep. I have to agree, those are some pretty despicable and embarrassing statements coming out of the mouths of your fellow republicans.  I'd be ashamed, too.  But by all means, do go on.

It doesn’t have anything to do with the republican party that I was a part of. This is just totally different. And all of these people who are saying this, y’know, and claiming that, y’know, they’re for all this stuff, they also sort of ostentatiously say, “Oh, we’re very religious people.  We really, we’re just very pious, Christian people.”  They were for torture, and electrocution of the people on along the border and all of that. That doesn’t have anything to do with, is contrary to the Christianity that I understand.

Let's just stop right there.

This isn't the party Danforth was a part of?  He didn't endorse Ed-Minuteman-Martin in 2010?  Pretty sure he did.

Instead of distancing himself from the republican party he claims to be embarrassed by, why doesn't Danforth start by calling out the extremists republicans in our own home state like Martin? Or Akin, who thinks that, "At the heart of Liberalism is a hatred for God."

Danforth claims later on that he dislikes divisive politics, but let's be honest, he's continually endorsed candidates who do nothing but spread fear and division across Missouri and our country.

Senator Danforth, start reforming your party with constructive criticism instead of continuing to endorse the same divisive republican politicians you claim to be embarrassed by. Show some leadership.