Obama Donors Complain About Lack of Perks

[SpartanDem]

You can't make this shit up. Seems like everybody is whining for their pony.

Some of President Obama's wealthiest supporters are becoming a bit whiny, and it has nothing to do with policy.

Tickets for tours of the presidential residence are scarce, even for those who raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for last year's campaign. Private fundraisers tend to be brief, businesslike affairs. And there have been no sleepovers in the Lincoln Bedroom, weekends at Camp David or intimate lunches with the first couple.

Nearly a year into his presidency, that pattern has led some top Democratic donors across the country to grumble that they aren't getting the kind of personal attention from Obama and access to the White House they became used to during the eight years of Bill Clinton's presidency.

"I've had almost no communication with the White House," said Chris Korge, a top supporter of Hillary Rodham Clinton from Miami who later collected $5.5 million for Obama, making him one of the president's biggest fundraisers.
{snip}

a review of appointments, visitor logs and other records shows that large bundlers account for only a small fraction of the hundreds of Senate-confirmed positions that Obama has moved to fill during his first 10 months in office. The numbers pale in comparison to Clinton's administration -- during which coziness with donors was legendary -- or to that of George W. Bush, who gave hundreds of jobs and other perks to wealthy supporters over the course of his presidency.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/03/AR2009120301751.html?hpid=topnews

[FrenchieCat]

1. They can get in line to kick the President's ass......

:rofl:

[babylonsister]

3. Isn't that the truth!

:rofl:

[HowHasItComeToThis]

11. HE HAS TREATED ME FINE

[demosincebirth]

25. Ditto!

[Cha]

27. Yeah, right after the Black Caucus!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x36626

[silverweb]

2. Because doing the right thing demands...

...ego stroking, kowtowing, and perks.

The rich jerks should be singing his praises for keeping it so squeaky clean.

[ClarkUSA]

4. The Clintons gave their donors all the perks they wanted. The same donors are whining re: Obama now.

No more nights in the Lincoln Bedroom sold to the highest bidder.... :cry:

Longtime Obama donors never got perks and would know not to ask by now.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

22. BWA HAHA!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:




Sorry, your rock star is no better or worse than Bill as far as selling out to the highest bidder.

They are all the same.

[ClarkUSA]

36. None of Obama's longtime original donors are the ones wanting a night in the Lincoln bedroom.

I guess old Clintonian-conditioned habits are hard to break.

This is the CHANGE I voted for.

:)

[slipslidingaway]

5. Pharma, Bio and Insurance companies are doing OK with their perks. n/t

[ClarkUSA]

6. Bullshit anti-Obama rhetoric is all you've got, baby. When you have some facts, let us know.

I'm not holding my breath. :hi:

[slipslidingaway]

10. Facts instead of nastiness ...

Could we save another 220 billion in addition to the 80 billion using VA prices...
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/110

Senator Carper Publicly Defends Secret PhRMA Deal In Exchange For Support Ads
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/112

AHIP commercial for health care reform - "If everyone is covered..."
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/97

AHIP & BCBSA support guaranteed issue and individual mandate
November 19, 2008
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/96

President Obama calls on Karen Ignagni of AHIP to speak on HC reform
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/77

They're Winning - Private insurance companies push for 'individual mandate'
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/11

Senate HELP amendment on "data exclusivity"
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/77

Uniquely American Solution - What is it ? Why is it being pushed?
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/63

THE HISTORY OF THE PUBLIC OPTION...
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/89

How do you win a fight if you silence the harshest critics of those who hold power....
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/86

[ClarkUSA]

13. Do you have any recent articles from credible unbiased non-partisan news sources?

:shrug:

[slipslidingaway]

16. first link in the first thread is the Obama/Biden health care plan...

very biased and not very credible, you did not even try.

:shrug:

"...Allow Medicare to negotiate for cheaper drug prices. The 2003 Medicare Prescription Drug
Improvement and Modernization Act bans the government from negotiating down the prices of
prescription drugs, even though the Department of Veterans Affairs’ negotiation of prescription drug
prices with drug companies has garnered significant savings for taxpayers.32

Barack Obama and Joe Biden will repeal the ban on direct negotiation with drug companies and use the resulting savings, which could be as high as $30 billion,33 to further invest in improving health care coverage and quality..."

It appears that we may have moved from a possible 300 billion over 10 years to 80 billion. Maybe the Nelson amendment will be added in the final bill, but that is still far short of what was discussed in the original plan.


Senator Carper explains the Pharma deal
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJa_kTXad1Q


You wanted some facts, but I cannot hold your hand, you have to want to see what is being given away to the for profit companies at the expense of the American citizens.

[ClarkUSA]

19. Is that it? That's old news.

:shrug:

[slipslidingaway]

18. Post your thoughts on the Pharma deal n/t

[ClarkUSA]

20. Why should I? It's old news and it doesn't have anything to do with the OP.

:shrug:

[slipslidingaway]

23. Too funny, accuse people of anti-Obama rhetoric, ask for facts then...

run away when facts are presented to you, now that is BS.

Posted by ClarkUSA
"Bullshit anti-Obama rhetoric is all you've got, baby. When you have some facts, let us know."

From the same Obama/biden plan - any American will have the opportunity to enroll - that changed as well. Guess the insurance companies won!

It does not mater if this is old news, every American will be paying for the profits of these companies, they got their perks.


"(2) NEW AFFORDABLE, ACCESSIBLE HEALTH INSURANCE OPTIONS. The Obama-Biden plan will create a
National Health Insurance Exchange to help individuals purchase new affordable health care options if they are
uninsured or want new health insurance. Through the Exchange, any American will have the opportunity to
enroll in the new public plan or an approved private plan..."

[ClarkUSA]

34. Not sure what you're angling for... I support Democratic efforts at HCR. I'm not a whiny ideologue.

:)

[slipslidingaway]

48. You whined because you wanted facts and then said the Obama/Biden

link was not a credible source!!!

Again you did not even try to discuss any of the deals and just continued slinging insults.

[msongs]

7. as are the billionaire war profiteers making $$ off the corpses of dead Americans nt

[ClarkUSA]

8. Still profiteering off those "Obama pillow cases" eh? And grandstanding off fallen soldiers to boot.

Classy as always. :eyes:

[slipslidingaway]

12. Yes, it never ends :( n/t

[ClarkUSA]

14. You're wrong. Both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars will end in 2011, thanks to Pres. Obama.

:)

[slipslidingaway]

17. That would be wonderful - everyone home by 2011 and HC for all. nt

[ClarkUSA]

21. "HC for all" by 2011? Only you're saying that.

:eyes:

[slipslidingaway]

24. Too bad the Dem leadership dropped the universal part in order to keep...

the investors happy.

[ClarkUSA]

33. Not true, but covering 94%-96% of Americans isn't a good enough beginning of HCR for you?

Why am I not surprised?

[joeglow3]

35. No, it is not good enough

Removing those already eligible for health care and illegals and we are already close to that. Basically, all this bill is doing is requiring the 10 million or so who could afford health insurance but choose not to get it to in fact purchase coverage. Basically, it is a HUGE kiss ass to the insurance industry.

[ClarkUSA]

38. Then stop whining, run for President and try passing better HCR through this Congress.

<<Basically, all this bill is doing is requiring the 10 million or so who could afford health insurance but choose not to get it to in fact purchase coverage.>>

Wrong.

"Top 14 Health Care Reform Provisions That Take Effect Immediately on January 1, 2010":
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=11487&mesg_id=11487

In the meantime, this bill is the best chance Americans have of achieving HCR in 60 years. You and other Failers can keep sneering,
but millions of Americans who have no chance of getting health insurance have HOPE that they will soon. Those Americans include
friends and family of mine, so what is an abtract ideological purity exercise for some is not for me and many others.

[joeglow3]

42. There are WAAAY too many attempts to buy votes

My wife and I do well for ourselves. Between us, we make about $85,000 a year. We manage to save about:

$12,000 a year in retirement accounts
$8,000 in taxable accounts (early retirement)
$9,600 a year in education accounts ($6,000 in ESA's and $3,600 in 529's).
In addition to this, we manage to send our kids to private school and provide out own health insurance.

We manage to do all of this because we live in a nice house well below what our peers live in. We only buy American made cars that are 2-3 years old and drive them into the ground. We have basic cable and one cellphone (with no texting, internet, etc.) between the two of us. We bought our first television last year (all our others were hand-me-down old school televisions).

And yet, since we have 3 kids, we make less than 4 times the poverty rate and would qualify for subsidies. While I love "free" money, I have NO need for it. Use this money to strengthen coverage for the poor. Basically, it attempts to kiss the ass of insurance companies and give "free" money to as many people as possible to buy votes.

I did not vote for this. I voted for meaningful reform to ensure those needing it most got the focus.

All that said, the "well then run for president" is a nice cop-out.

[ClarkUSA]

43. Well goody for you. How nice it must be for you to be so well off compared to so many Americans.

Lots of folks haven't been able to get a job for over a year, have no savings, can't buy their kids anything for the holidays, much
less send them to private school and have education accounts, are living off their dwindling HELOCs if they're lucky enough to
have them but are still looking at foreclosure soon if they don't get a job, or are living off the kindness of relatives. Many I know
are running out of their COBRA and will have to go without health insurance because of pre-existing conditions if HCR doesn't
pass soon.

These people paid enough taxes over their lifetime to qualify for what you sneeringly call '"free" money' and need state and federal
assistance to pay their energy bills and to buy food for their families, as well as get their kids to clinic for vaccinations and check-ups.

<<All that said, the "well then run for president" is a nice cop-out.>>

No, it's a reality check for those anonymous keyboard whiners who seem to think passing the perfect legislation is easy.
What's the real cop-out is your ignoring my link to the 14 immediate HCR provisions that would kick in on Jan. 1 2010 if the HCR
bill is signed into law: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=11487&mesg_id=11487

Guess you can't acknowledge the facts because they contradict your claim that HCR doesn't do a damned thing for those Americans
in real need of health insurance because they have nowhere near as fortunate a life as you and your family possess.

:eyes:

[joeglow3]

44. Nice of you to ignore the entire point of my post...

...and try to twist it. Those ARE the people we should be focusing on. People making $80,000 a year should NOT be getting subsidies (but will under this bill).

And I agree with MOST of the 14 points (number 14 will have NO impact in 2010, so its inclusion is BS). All I am saying is that maybe we could bring the cost down and make it a bit easier to pass (something you admit has many challenges) if we simply focused on those who need the help.

[ClarkUSA]

46. I ignored your point because it referenced your good fortune as a standard for all those making $80K

$80K is peanuts for those living in many areas of this country, including mine. You're entitled to your opinion but there's no way I agree with it from my own experience and that of others I know.

<<And I agree with MOST of the 14 points... All I am saying is that maybe we could bring the cost down and make it a bit easier to pass (something you admit has many challenges) if we simply focused on those who need the help.>>

Well, the cost according to the CBO is pretty darned "down" because even Republicans can't find much to complain about it. I agree with the general hypothesis of what you're saying although I disagree with your opinion that those who make everyone who makes $80K doesn't need subsidies just because you've been fortunate in your life, live in a relatively inexpensive area and obviously haven't made a lot of mistakes along the way. For those with pricier homes or a lot of debt or just got jobs and have no savings, or live in expensive regions of the country or have alot of kids or pay pricey alimony and even pricier child support to ex-wives, those subsidies are the difference between getting insurance with a sigh of relief or not getting insurance because paying bills and having enough to eat is more important.

[slipslidingaway]

49. You only get a subsidy if you purchase through the exchange and many

people will not be able to use the exchange.

That was one of the changes, the Obama/Biden plan said ANY American could use the exchange, but that was amended.

http://healthreform.kff.org/SubsidyCalculator.aspx

"Note: Subsidies are only available for people purchasing coverage on their own in the Exchange (not through an employer)..."


CBO report on premiums - Also comments on subsidies
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/slipslidingaway/214


"...About 57 percent of individuals eligible for coverage in the exchange will receive subsidies which will more than offset the premium increases. Note that most individuals are not eligible for coverage in the exchange and would not receive these subsidies.

* Although there will be little change in premiums for small group plans, about 12 percent of people in the small group market will benefit from a small business tax credit designed to encourage small business owners to offer coverage to their employees.

The really bad news in this report is that, on average, premiums for group plans will continue to increase at the same intolerable rates that they would have if we did nothing. This CBO analysis demonstrates that, in 2016, the family premium alone for employer-sponsored coverage, not including deductibles and other out-of-pocket costs, would be over $20,000 for a large group plan, whether or not the proposed legislation is enacted. That is quite a hit for a hard-working family with a $60,000 income..."

[slipslidingaway]

47. Just because someone has insurance does not mean they have access...

to care and if they do, whether or not they can afford to use the care.

[Cha]

28. Notice you didn't address the OP

in front of us..would that tax your brain too much?

[slipslidingaway]

29. Yes, just like many people who cannot have a dialog on the perks...

given to the corporations that will affect every person in this nation. Really not interested that some big supporters are not getting the personal perks they had hoped.

More concerned about our HC being sold to the for profit companies, just a matter of what you consider important.

:shrug:

An extra 220 billion to the drug companies and other deals tops the list for me.

[Cha]

30. It was a simple question..no thanks for the non answer.

[slipslidingaway]

32. My answer was yes, in case you missed the first word of my post....

I could care less about their personal access right now.

Negotiating for Medicare drug prices, when there will be an additional 33 million people on Medicare over the next 20 years, is more important IMO.

Too bad many people do not want to discuss that deal.

:(

[DCBob]

9. F'ck em all..

:puke:

[PM Martin]

15. You got him into the Whitehouse, that is your "perk".

[Historic NY]

26. He did say he would change they way of doing business.

[Hippo_Tron]

31. That's what happens when you raise about $700 million

A few whiney people who want perks won't be missed.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

37. Oh, cry me a f***ing river!!!!

:nopity:

I guess if they wanted some "perks" for donating to President Obama's campaign they should have gotten it in writing. If they are upset about not getting "perks" for their contributions, then it sounds like President Obama may be doing something right. Change we can believe in?

[ClarkUSA]

39. Definitely. And past Outrage over Pres. Obama giving lots of jobs to donors is also proved false.

<<Change we can believe in?>>

Absolutely.

[uponit7771]

40. Corporatist warmonger rich people worshipper!!! PONY!!!! /sarcasm

[treestar]

45. Yes, where is that crowd now?

:rofl:

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

41. Sounds good to me. nt