Comforting The Powerful

Why would a newspaper scrupulously avoid criticizing elected officials in its editorials--even when criticism follows logically from its editorial position?

Is it about celebrity worship? Back-scratching? Timidity?

Are there more positions on Sen. Collins' staff opening up soon?

Profiles In Bad Faith

Sen. Collins votes against even debating the Senate health care reform bill, which looks an awful lot like the Obama plan that she termed, "pretty good" during the 2008 campaign.

In a statement, Collins calls the bill "divisive" and "partisan."

Divisive and partisan, indeed.

Picking Their Battles

Gerald has a couple questions about Sen. Collins' priorities, and those of Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT).

Quote of the Day

MIT health care economist Jon Gruber, winner of the Health Economists Inaugural medal for the best U.S. health economist under 40:

It [health care reform as proposed] does real things on cost control, and then it does real things to make cost control more politically viable. It lays the groundwork for doing more. To kill this bill for not doing enough on cost control would be like criticizing the Yankees for not winning the Super Bowl. They won the World Series! They did what they could do!

Thought of the Day

When you boil it down, Sen. Collins seems to be saying that she voted against Part D before she voted for it.

Asked, Unanswered

After months and months of fawning, pliant coverage from the Maine media, a genuine reporter has stood up and had the temerity to ask Sen. Collins not one but two serious question about health care reform.

Kudos to Jackie Farwell and Mainebiz:

You've said you're troubled by the proposal to fund reform by cutting $500 billion from Medicare. How do you suggest we pay for the reform?

I think part of the problem with the bill is that it would finance a massive expansion of government, totaling a trillion, over a trillion dollars if you look at the House bill for example, and it would do so by slashing $500 billion out of the Medicare program and by imposing a series of new taxes, fees and penalties on small businesses, on individuals and on medical equipment manufacturers and on insurance companies. The problem with that is those increased taxes...are going to drive up the cost of health insurance. For example, probably half the insurers in this country are nonprofit and yet they are going to have new taxes to pay. They are going to pass that on to the consumer.

So I think we need an approach that focuses more on reducing the cost of health care and then invest those savings into expanding coverage. I would start by providing generous tax credits for small businesses because over 60% of people who are uninsured work for small businesses that can’t afford to provide them insurance. So to help to make health insurance more affordable to small businesses, you would lower the number of uninsured Americans by a substantial amount, by millions.

So Collins is going to pay for expanded coverage by...giving out tax credits? In short, by giving out more money? An unorthodox approach to cost trimming to say the least.

And that's the only solution she puts forward, unless you count her comment about "reducing the cost of health care." But of course, everyone wants to reduce costs. Being able to throw around buzzwords isn't the same thing as having an actual plan.

Bottom line: Collins, asked a direct question, replied with what is basically gobbledygook.

And it gets better:

You voted for Medicare Part D, which was an unfunded new health care program and the costs are estimated now around $1 trillion. But the Finance Committee’s health care bill would be offset by cuts elsewhere, and Obama has said he won’t sign it if it increases the deficit. Can you explain your rationale?

Medicare Part D has turned out to be far less expensive than the amount that you just quoted...I voted to means test Medicare Part D so that higher-income people would be paying more for their drug coverage and that would have lowered the cost even further. My position didn't prevail on that, but I did vote to means test--in other words to require high-income people to pay more of a premium than lower-income people for Medicare Part D, so I've shown that I've been concerned about the cost of Medicare.

Um, what? Sure, Collins voted for an amendment to means test the unfunded, budget-busting program--to make it slightly less fiscally irresponsible. But when that amendment failed she still voted for the bill.

For this she wants credit? Because she voiced some (purported) misgivings about an indefensible plan before helping it become a reality?

Ridiculous--and almost laughable.

Amazing what happens when someone asks serious, straightforward questions.

Star Struck

PPH, with ample access to Sen. Collins, apparently chooses not to ask her a single penetrating question.

(Or maybe they did, and just decided not to report on it.)

Standing Out

Credit Sen. Collins for standing up to her GOP colleagues, at least so far, on Afghanistan:

Ten of 11 Republicans on the Senate Armed Services Committee are...marking Veterans' Day with a joint letter urging the president to give the commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the forces he has requested.

The letter was signed by every Republican on the committee save for moderate Susan Collins of Maine.

Collins is going her own way. She said she agrees it’s time for Obama's decision on troop levels but "I did not wish to sign on to a letter telling him what decision he should make as commander in chief."

"Once his decision is made and justified to Congress, I will assess and comment on it."

Disingenuousness Watch

Reputedly pro-choice Sen. Susan Collins:

"If Congress makes the mistake of establishing a new government-owned insurance company, it would need to extend the prohibition [on abortion coverage] to that company because it is using federal funds."

Collins is widely considered "pro-choice." It's a key part of her moderate branding.

But that self-description is--at best--a huge oversimplification of her views. If you were inclined to be less generous, you might even call it a deception.

More here.

Just Stop It. Seriously.

Shame on Sen. Susan Collins. Tons of bluster, zero self-examination.

And remember, HHS Secretary Sebelius hadn't even been confirmed when Collins stripped $780 million in pandemic flu preparedness funding from the stimulus bill.

If Collins knows a way to speed the production and distribution of vaccine, she ought to go ahead and share that information with the scientists.

And while she's got them on the phone, she ought to apologize for this:

Profiles In Shhh

Rep. Pingree speaks up about Question 1. Sen. Collins? Not so much.

Hypocrisy Watch

From MPBN:

Maine Sen. Susan Collins has come out in opposition to President Obama's nomination of Rafael Borras for a top post at the Department of Homeland Security.

[...]

Collins says in his current position, Borras manages 100 people, and in the new DHS position, he would manage more than 200,000 people, along with a $50 billion annual budget.

Collins says Borras also made numerous tax errors on recent federal income tax filings, mistakes she says "show a lack of attention of detail and a pattern of carelessness."

Despite the objections of Collins and other Republicans on the panel, Borras nomination was approved by a vote of 7 to 3.

Borras managed fifteen hundred people during his time as a regional administrator for the General Services Administration's Mid-Atlantic region during the 1990s. And before that, he was deputy assistant secretary of the Commerce Department. So he's certainly got experience as a manager.

So is the main objection supposed to be a few unspecified tax errors? Is there more to the story? It's not entirely clear.

But it would be interesting to hear the junior senator explain how Borras' credentials and foibles stack up against those of former Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE) head Julie Myers.

Myers, you'll remember, was the 36-year-old niece of retired Joint Chiefs Chair Richard B. Myers and wife of Michael Chertoff's chief of staff who was elevated to her ICE leadership post via recess appointment by the Bush administration--even though she lacked any relevant immigration or bureaucracy management experience.

As Myers' awaited confirmation, she raised further questions about her fitness for the post by famously awarding a racist Halloween costume first prize at an agency Halloween party. Then she allegedly destroyed evidence of the incident.

Talk about bad judgment.

So what did Susan Collins think of all this? You guessed it: She stood by Myers and her thin resume. Collins supported her confirmation.

Of course, it's not possible that the junior senator has different standards for Republican administrations than she has for Democratic ones.

Is it?

BDN: Public Option Essential

They write editorials:

Without the public option--Democrats are now calling it the "consumer option" and "competitive option," to explain its raison d'etre--the health care bill is a partial fix, something like putting three new snow tires on the car.

Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe, whose vote for the Finance Committee's version of the bill without a public option was gratefully embraced by the Obama administration, is now signaling her disapproval of the revival of the government-run plan. Her GOP colleague, Sen. Susan Collins, also appears likely to abandon the reform effort if it contains a public option.

Of course, on the other hand, Sens. Snowe and Collins have interesting biographies and seem like really nice people...

Missed This

The Lewiston Sun Journal has some thoughts:

As soon as Sen. Olympia Snowe voted for health care reform, the nation's eyes turned toward her counterpart, Sen. Susan Collins. Hijinks ensued.

[...]

On Oct. 14, [Collins] released a long statement that essentially said she endorses health reform that produces more affordable insurance options and doesn't cost too much money. But this is not particularly helpful because, regardless of partisan sensibilities, everybody wants that. The question is how it's done.

[...]

Poker faces are valuable in politics, we understand. On this issue, however, Collins shouldn't be concerned about making detailed sentiments on reform clear. In fact, as the former state insurance commissioner, her opinions would be quite valuable to this process.

[...]

We know Collins has strong positions on health care reform, yet in the context of the pending legislation, nobody quite understands what they are, and she isn't saying...Her position as a U.S. senator requires her to let her constituents know what she thinks.

(Via Al Diamon.)