Consider how the health care debate would be perceived by the guy watching the nightly news if they heard the answers to these questions from every reporter, pundit and guest discussing health care.

Do you have any money invested in medical sector stocks? If yes, what percentage of your portfolio is in the health sector?

Have you accepted campaign contributions or PAC money from medical sector employees or companies? If so what percentage of your contributions come from the health sector?

Do you have health insurance? If so is it employer based or an individual policy?

What percentage of your income goes to pay for your and your family's health care?

The answers to those questions would color the debate on health care. Of course, with television news being what it is today, there would be no time to talk about health care after these disclosures are made, but you get my point. In the interest of time, I'd be satisfied if they were asked either question number 3 or 4. The answers to these questions would amply explain much of the health care reform rhetoric coming out of Republican mouths these days.

::::

Why can't the media report the progress on health care reform?

I have no doubts that Andrea Mitchell (eligible for Medicare in 3 years) already knows the biases her guests have concerning health care, but why not make sure her viewers know them? I already said my piece about Nancy Snyderman, but left out this nugget these nuggets. I guess she's more about health care corporate profits and less about health care. Continuing on with a theme here, can you imagine Lou Dobbs admitting in September 2010 that he qualifies for Medicare and takes CNN as his primary insurance and has Medicare as his Secondary Payer?

What would happen if Charles Gibson (BTW, he qualifies for Medicare) admitted that he pays less than 1% of his income on health care? We already know his main complaint is inconvenient waits for appointments. How would it change the complexion of the arguments if Maria Bartiromo, Katie Couric or Wolf Blitzer and John King admitted their biases? What would happen if these same people admitted they are uninformed about healthcare issues? Are there any media personalities other than Ed Schultz, Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann that are educated about health care reform? Lord knows Rush Limbaugh is an idiot on the subject. And could someone explain Dana Bash's incompetence on health care to me?

If we required Congressional members to recuse themselves from votes on companies they are invested in, 25% of our Congressional members would likely not be able to vote on health care. While I can see the impracticality of a proposal like that, the deceit, lies, medically related bankruptcys and stress are too much. The uninsured, underinsured and those who live in poverty have death rates that are too high.

These conflicts of interest of media personalities, pundits and politicians need greater exposure and the exposure needs to be repeated regularly.

::::

What does $1.4 million a day in lobbying money buy?

(Please feel free to add your own names and links to my small list here.)

Max Baucus limits access to people willing to pay $10,000 to spend some quality time with him. This is old news and not particularly novel, yet, at the same time it explains why he has a deaf ear to proponents of The Public Option.

Chris Dodd can be offended all he likes, but it is important to realize why he isn't pushing The Public Option as well as he could.

Evan Bayh seems to have the same trouble.

Eric Cantor has a relationship with Eli Lily and insurers.

Who is Chuck Grassley listening to? It sure isn't the 56% of Iowans who want a Public Option. He's invested in health care stocks through his Mutual Fund Investments, which may be enough of a step away for some people but he does take quite a bit from insurance companies and the rest of the health care sector. Apparently, the corporate interests supersede his constituents' interest. I wonder if anyone has bothered to send the good people of Iowa a memo on their Senator? Grassley's health care position seems to be framed around political opposition more than around solving problems for his constituents.

"As many as 119 million Americans would shift from private coverage to the government plan," Grassley wrote in a column for Politico.com. That migration, Grassley said, would "put America on the path toward a completely government-run health care system. ... Eventually, the government plan would overtake the entire market." Grassley's logic is that so many Americans would prefer a government-run plan that the private health insurance industry would collapse or become a shadow of its current self. That, in turn, would lead even more Americans entering the government plan, making private insurance even less viable. Rarely has an argument more dramatically highlighted the philosophical question of whether in a democracy, the government should represent the people's interests or an industry's.

::::

So the democratic debate is between money vs. voters.

The majority of Americans overwhelmingly support and want (2 to 1) health care reform and we want it now. Health insurers, pharma and many physiciansdon't want meaningful reform because they know they will make less money and will curtail their way of doing business. Small business owners see that Congress supports a mandate, but not a Public Option and are afraid of losing their businesses.

::::

Dear Senators and Representatives By choosing to represent corporate interests over that of the individual in need of health care, you make clear who your masters are. What you forget is that corporations may fund you, but they can't vote. Health care is very personal. It may be a game to you, but someone who can't afford to see a doctor or get a drug their child needs because you decided to side with corporate health insurance (AHIP), pharma and the AMA sees you for what you are. The Public Option is the compromise we are willing to live with. A co-op keeps private insurers still able to do recission, cherry picking and double premiums every 8 years. It's up to you to represent the voters in your district. Take the pledge to vote against any health care reform proposal that doesn't feature a robust Public Option that takes effect the first day of health reform.

Please makes some calls

White House at: 202-456-1111

Here's the front page to the House of Representatives and Senate. You can use the front pages to find your representative and use the main number, (202) 224-3121 to be transferred directly to any Senator or Representative's office.