medicaid

The liberal advocacy group that helped draft Elizabeth Warren into the US Senate campaign in 2011 is now trying to make Barney Frank her junior senator. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee sent an email to 25,000 Massachusetts members Wednesday afternoon asking them to sign an online petition urging Governor Deval Patrick to appoint Frank as the state’s interim senator. The group also launched a website, AppointBarneyFrank.com.

Adam Green talked about the work of his Progressive Change Campaign Committee, and the organization’s agenda for the 113th Congress.*He also outlined what progressives would like to see from President Obama in his second term.

When Massachusetts Democrat Elizabeth Warren and the rest of the 2013 class of liberal senators start work this month, they’ll have to do more than figure out the byzantine ways of getting things done in Washington. They’ll also have to decide how seriously to engage a progressive movement that sees their assent a historic opportunity to shift the Democratic Party to the left.

“The cavalry is arriving,” said Adam Green, cofounder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. “A lot of news coverage after the election focused on Democrats winning two seats, but the big story for us is the composition of the Democratic caucus has moved in a massively progressive direction.”

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee sent an email to Democratic senior staffers in both the House and Senate at 3 p.m. ET Monday, after word trickled out that a deal in the works would only raise taxes for households making $450,000 and above (or $400,000 for individuals.) The email, obtained by TPM, argued that Democrats have no practical reason to cave on taxes and would actually have increased leverage if Congress blows through the midnight deadline to avoid the cliff. “Democrats hold the cards, and our leverage increases in less than 10 hours if we hold strong,” the email, signed by the group’s co-founders Adam Green and Stephanie Taylor, read.

Preserving Social Security should never have been all that difficult.

But it took Harry Reid to settle the issue —at least as regards the miserably long and absurdly inappropriate debate of 2012.

“We’re not going to have any Social Security cuts,” the Senate majority leader said on the floor of the chamber Sunday. “It’s just doesn’t seem appropriate at this time.”… The Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which did so much to strengthen the backbones of Reid and other Democrats, responded in with the proper mix of celebration and resolve. “Democrats stood firm — and Harry Reid declared from the Senate floor that no deal would pass this year that touched Social Security,” declared PCCC co-founders Stephanie Taylor and Adam Green in a message to the hundreds of thousands of PCCC members who contacted Congress with messages opposing any cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid benefits. “Today’s victory shows that activism works. In 2013, we’ll keep fighting any proposed cuts to these benefits.”

Social Security was worth fighting for in 2012.

And because activists prevailed—with an assist from Harry Reid—it will be worth fighting for in 2013.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee is urging Democrats to hold their “bright line position” on taxes and entitlements ahead of a meeting Friday in which President Obama will reportedly offer congressional leaders a scaled-back deal to avert the fiscal cliff.

The Progressive Change Campaign Committee says a majority of House Democrats have pledged to vote against any budget deal that includes the “chained CPI” Social Security cut. The PCCC’s conclusion is based on a count of signatures on a 2011 letter and a statement from the Congressional Progressive Caucus this week.

For Obama, these voices are significant. He is losing the allies who should be in the forefront of the fight to seal any deal he reaches with House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio. Without a solid base of Democratic votes in the House and Senate for it, this deal won’t be done. And make no mistake: a fiscal-cliff compromise that compromises Social Security should not be done. Period. That’s the message coming from the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which as usual has moved rapidly — and effectively — to build mass opposition to a cut that will only happen if Americans are unaware of the threat.

Outside liberal groups are keeping up pressure on Democrats to ward off a deal that includes any changes to Social Security. Adam Green, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, threatened primary challenges for Democratic lawmakers flirting with supporting the CPI change and warned that progressives were already getting mobilized to lobby members. “People are under the kind of delusional idea that the American public would applaud cutting their own grandparents’ Social Security benefits because compromise is just that important,” Green said in an interview. “Well, it’s not. There’s a good compromise and a bad compromise.”

Stephanie Taylor, the co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, said the chained CPI plan is “unacceptable.” A labor source called it “insanity.” As Matt Yglesias pointed out this morning, the chained CPI is also unpopular, with 60 percent opposed to “changing Social Security to increase at a slower rate” and only 34 percent in favor.

The liberal Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC) on Tuesday morning circulated criticism from a handful of progressive players, signifying that politicians and interest groups on the left, who have decried any cuts to Social Security or Medicare, will coordinate at least some degree of pushback against this movement toward a compromise.

When Warren laid out the approach in a debate with departing Sen. Scott Brown during the campaign, it instantly entered the progressive canon… And the plan has widespread support beyond just liberals, progressives argue. Case in point, the PCCC polled voters in two swing states (Virginia and New Hampshire), and in Obama’s home state of Illinois, about Warren’s plan. The poll, conducted by PPP and shared with Salon before its release, didn’t mention Warren’s name, but asked about individual components. All had broad support.

A coalition of liberal groups this week delivered petitions with more than 21,000 names to Villaraigosa’s office, demanding that he resign from the Campaign to Fix the Debt, which those on the left consider to be a right-wing plot to slash Social Security, Medicare and other social service and support programs, and protect the wealthy against tax increases. Move.on, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee and the California-based Courage Campaign are joining forces to pressure Villaraigosa, as detailed in this item on the Calitics website.

In a sign that progressive push-back against Los Angeles Mayor Villariagosa’s membership in the right-wing “Fix The Debt” lobbying group isn’t abating, activists from MoveOn.org and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee delivered over 21,000 signatures to LA City Hall this afternoon demanding Villariagosa resign from the group’s steering committee.

Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD)

During his weekly address yesterday, House Minority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) told the press that major cuts to Medicare benefits must be on the table:

Hoyer said GOP proposals to raise the Medicare eligibility age, make wealthier seniors pay higher Medicare rates and limit the cost-of-living increases for some federal programs are legitimate ones, even as he warned he might not support them.

ai???They clearly are on the table,ai??? Hoyer said of the Medicare changes during his weekly press briefing in the Capitol. ai???They were on the table in the Boehner-Obama talks. They’ve been on the table for some period of time. That does not mean that I’d be prepared to adopt them now, but they’re clearly, I think, on the table.ai???

Seniors on Medicare did not cause our deficit — Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans, two wars, and Wall Street’s recession did. They should not be asked to pay through their hard-earned benefits.

We’re asking PCCC members to make calls to Hoyer’s office to ask him to take cuts in Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid benefits off the table. Click here to make a call.

The truth is that on every prominent economic issue of our time, the public overwhelmingly agrees with the progressive position. If 74 percent of voters oppose cuts to Medicare benefits and only 17 percent support them (which is true in New Hampshire), progressives insisting on the 74 percent position is different than the Tea Party insisting on the 17 percent position. One is democracy. The other is fringe incalcitrance. Equating the two is either ignorant or dishonest, but in either case destructive. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee did our homework and hired the No. 1 most-accurate pollster of 2012, Public Policy Polling, to poll New Hampshire voters on these fiscal issues (with more states to come). As the Union Leader’s John DiStaso reported, huge majorities of voters in the “Live Free Or Die” state support taxing the rich, oppose cutting benefits, and support cutting corporate welfare. They also say that President Obama’s mandate is not to compromise for its own sake, but to “stand up for regular families – even if that means fighting.” That’s a mandate – a mandate for “the left.” The only question is whether Democrats will use it to fight for the will of the people.

The poll gave strong indication that Granite Staters oppose cuts to Medicare and Medicaid benefits and support higher taxes for the rich. If Shaheen supported cuts to Medicare of Medicaid, 46 percent said they would be less likely to vote for her, while 35 percent said it would not make a difference, 13 percent said they would be more likely to vote for her and 7 percent were not sure, according to the poll. If Shaheen “led the national fight to raise taxes on the rich,” 48 percent said they would be more likely to vote for her, while 31 percent said they would be less likely to vote for her, 19 percent said it would not make a difference and 1 percent said they were not sure.

But ultimately, Obama cannot implement a deal alone. He has to get members of his own party to vote for it in Congress—so regardless of the president’s disposition, there are many pressure points in Congress for progressives who want to keep Democrats from cutting the safety net. To that end, the Progressive Change Campaign Committee has been seeking out Democrats running in tough races and getting them on board with a no-cuts agenda, in exchange for valuable financial and logistical support. At least eight House candidates are receiving PCCC support, along with four Senators or Senate candidates: Sen. Sherrod Brown, Elizabeth Warren, Tammy Baldwin, and now Representative Shelley Berkley, whom PCCC endorsed on Monday. On a call with volunteers this week—joined, quite notably, by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid—Berkley re-stated her position on safety net cuts: “I will promise you without fear of contradiction, I will do everything in my power to strengthen and protect Medicare and Social Security and it’s going to be a cold day in the middle of August in the Nevada desert before I do anything that’s going to harm those two essential programs.”

Earlier this week, Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal (R) announced that he will not be complying with the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of Medicaid. “I do not have any intentions of expanding Medicaid,” Deal told a reporter at the Republican National Convention. “I think that is something our state cannot afford.”

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported yesterday that an estimated 650,000 Georgians are expected to receive care thanks to the Medicaid expansion, which means that Deal’s obstruction would leave an enormous number of people without access to health care (one out of every five Georgians is currently uninsured). Additionally, the state’s hospitals are in uproar over Deal’s decision, with one official saying that he is “certainly putting hospitals at risk” by not allowing the flow of federal dollars that allows for them to care for patients.

As US News & World Reports notes, the “federal government would pick up the tab for most of the Medicaid expansion when it is implemented in 2014, but states would be required to pay for 10 percent of it by 2020.”

That’s a relatively small price to pay for securing the health andAi??well-beingAi??of most of the people in your state. But Deal doesn’t want to pay, and Georgians may suffer as a result.

Progressive groups are speaking out against the debt ceiling deal currently being hashed out in Washington. The response from two of the nation’s largest organizations goes essentially like this: Really?!?

The liberal advocacy group Progressive Change Campaign Committee delivered 200,000 pledges to President Obama’s campaign headquarters Friday, demanding he hold their line in debt ceiling negotiations or lose their support.

About a dozen people representing the Progressive Change Campaign Committee delivered what they said were 200,000 pledges from people who will refuse to donate or volunteer for Obama’s re-election campaign if he cuts the entitlement programs.

“It’s not a question of who they’re going to support for president, they’re going to vote for Barack Obama. It’s a question of where their time and money is going to go,” spokesman T. Neil Sroka said.

With entitlement programs potentially on the chopping block during the current debt ceiling negotiations, a prominent liberal group is threatening to pull its support for President Barack Obama’s reelection campaign if Medicaid, Medicare or Social Security benefits are cut.

In Chicago, members of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee delivered 200,000 petitions to Obama’s Prudential Building headquarters, threatening to cut off donations and volunteer hours if Obama puts Medicare and Social Security on the table. Ann Marie Habershaw, the COO of the Obama Campaign, met the small group in the Prudential Building lobby to receive the petitions.

A group of liberal Democrats who fundraised and volunteered for Barack Obama in 2008 plans to protest Friday outside his reelection campaign headquarters in Chicago. Organizers with the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, a liberal PAC, say they will attempt to deliver 200,000 signatures on a pledge to withhold support from the president if he consents to cuts to federal entitlement programs.