Worth Reading - Article by Dr. Jay Fleitman - on The Shift in Health Care Delivery -

Usually one finds this blog commenting on an particular article, however this one article by Dr. Jay Fleitman is not only of great import, but aslo informative. To that end, it is shared here in the interest of the public.

From the Hampshire Gazette: "Jay Fleitman: Liberty bows in health care shift
By JAY FLEITMAN"

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

NORTHAMPTON - As chairman of the board of a local health care corporation, I recently prepared for our annual meeting, which was attended by over 100 physicians and representatives of the hospital administration and board of trustees. I discussed new and coming health care vehicles we have with the major insurance companies of Massachusetts.

These will fundamentally change the way health care is delivered. They carry acronyms like AQC (alternative quality contract) and ACO (accountable care organizations). These are known as risk sharing arrangements, which means that the providers of your medical care, hospitals and physicians, are at risk for the cost of the health care services they deliver to their patients. The less they spend on delivering those services, the more they are awarded in bonuses.

Yes, there are incentives built in for delivering quality care, but the real driver in these plans, both through private insurers and government, is to reduce the money spent on medical care. Legislation coming on Beacon Hill will accelerate this process already in place through Medicare and large Massachusetts insurers.

The holy grail and ultimate endpoint of this process is population-based care. This model has associations of physicians and hospitals being paid a lump sum to manage care for an entire defined population of consumers.

This is the future envisioned for American health care. The health care dollar, it is argued, will be more efficiently managed by consortiums of experts whose job it is to define what choices are acceptable.

One thing is conspicuously missing from these discussions. This is America, land of the free, a nation predicated on the liberty of the individual. The discretion of the individual citizen and family to control their own destiny is never part of these deliberations. The American citizen will be progressively stripped by experts and payers of their freedom of choice in personal health care decisions.

Americans would never tolerate this interference in our choices of food. We chafe at the government forcing our choice of light bulbs. Yet, for health care we are giving away our freedom to entities with no knowledge of the intimate details of our lives.

The money being managed by these systems is the private citizen's money. Whether it is your taxpayer dollar being spent in a government program or the insurance premium being paid by your employer as part of your reimbursement package, it is the individual's money being given over by proxy.

The "individual mandate" requires the citizen to buy insurance or pay a tax surcharge. By having everyone in the pool, the premiums on average are cheaper for everyone. What's next? Tax anyone over the age 50 who doesn't have a colonoscopy because they may ultimately cost the system more money if they develop colon cancer? This is not so farfetched. We tax cigarettes with the rationale that smokers cost society more in health care costs. The Massachusetts governor recently applied the same notion to raising taxes on candy and soda.

The Republican presidential candidates speak of fundamentally restructuring the health care system, and they are right. The health care dollar must be in the hands of the American citizen, not distributed in larger and more remote schemes by insurers and bureaucrats who are distant from individual choice.

This is not hard to craft. Indiana offers state employees the option of having catastrophic insurance that protects them after $8,000 in medical costs, and a health care savings account that covers the first $5,000 of the up-front cost. The employees keep the unspent money at the end of the year. Eighty percent of employees chose that plan, and their freedom in administering their own health care costs them 35 percent less than usual insurance plans. If someone understands the benefits of a medical service and decides not to spend their money on it, that is their choice to make. They may have better use of that money - a child in college or a sick parent.

We can open up markets across state lines, giving consumers far more choice in products.

I manage my medical practice by these politics. I believe that it is my duty to the fellow citizens who seek my care to respect their autonomy. I inform them of their choices and options, so they are able to exert control over their lives.

I am tempted to say that if Americans continue to cede their freedoms, the nation deserves to lose them.

Unfortunately, we are the protector of these freedoms for generations to follow, and so we squander their heritage as well.

As a physician living in Massachusetts under mandated Universal Health Care, as well as the Federal version, one can get a better grasp on the problems faced by physicians in their health care delivery and the solutions they offer, based on expertise not owned by a bureaucrat. Many thanks to Dr. Fleitman for sharing this most important article.

The State of Maine Added to Growing List of Health Care Reform Act Waiver Recipients

State of Maine - Health Care Reform Waiver Granted - image: NSHclassics.com

The State of Maineis one of the latest entities (and first State) to receive a waiver from complying with Health Care Reform. According to CNBC, the State feared that implementing the Federal Plan would force one of their three health insurers out of the state. Maine joins an ever expanded list of waivers granted; over 1000 waivers had been granted since the inception of Health Care Reform, the cornerstone of the Obama Administration. (CBS News).

The fact that Maine, like many other states, limits the number of health insurance carrier choices is part and parcel of the problem. This practice creates a virtual monopoly, allowing those carriers to set prices based on a state structured risk pool; the end result is an increase in premiums to consumers. The limit of carriers coupled with state mandated coverage of benefits, drives the costs upward annually.

When a state opens its border to competition, however, the end result is a variety of choices in health plans as well as a reduction in premiums. Nowhere is this more evident than in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, where previously there were a limited number of auto insurance carriers to choose from and premiums were some of the highest in the nation. When the laws were changed to allow more carriers into the state, insurance premiums dropped rapidly – competing firms were touting savings up to 50% and consumers rejoiced. Although one might think that comparing auto to health insurance is akin to comparing apples to oranges, it is the same principles of broadening the risk pools and competition among businesses that would guide both. – The end result, more choices, lower premiums, no need for the State and or Federal government to intercede.

As the President continues to fight against the Federal Court Ruling that made his Health Care Reform Law, unconstitutional the administration is handing out waivers left and right, mainly to businesses and unions – the list can be found here at www.hss.gov/ociio/regulations/approved_applications_for_waiver.htm. It is beyond the time to stop wasting time and dollars on continuing lawsuits, and implementing this program for some not all and look towards a smarter option which allows freedom of choice for the consumer.

For an excellent treatment on proposed changes to Massachusetts Health Care, which, one must be wary, due to the simple fact that the National Model is based on Massachusetts’s plan, read "Proposed Health Care Reform is a Proven Loser” written by Dr. Jay Fleitman. Dr. Fleitman writes a column for the Daily Hampshire Gazette. Dr. Fleitman also served as the Chair of the Board of Health for the City of Northampton; he ran for Congress in 2010 and is the current Chairman of the Western Mass. Republicans.

Gallup Highlights Tea Party Importance – The Tea Party Comparison To 60’s Political Revolution

The Tea Party Patriot - image sumo tv

Politico’sJennfier Epstein, picked up on Gallup’s Tea Party poll – The question posed: Should the GOP Consider Tea Party Ideas with the result, a resounding, cross party lines, yes. It is not so much, as Epstein pointed out, that Gallup specified what the ideals of the Tea Party included, rather “leaving respondents to decide for themselves.” - while she included the following definition: “The movement draws on populist sentiments and pushes an agenda focused on reducing taxes, government spending and the national debt.” (Politico)

Gallup released the poll on Monday paired the national opinion of the Republican versus the Tea Party, with the end result that the Republican Party scored slightly higher on favorability at 47% overall, with the Tea Party garnering 39% approval. The poll included Democrats, Republicans and non-affiliated respondents, and implies that the Republican-Tea Party Movement are aligned, or in completion with one another, rather than the reality that the Tea Party Movement is a separate entity with some similar views held by established Republicans.

What would be more useful: a poll comparing the favorability of the Tea Party compared and contrasted with the both the Republican and Democrat Party. It goes without saying that Tea Party Members ran as Republican’s, gaining seats in historical proportions in the House of Representatives in this past election. Savvy politicos understand that running as an Independent and/or Libertarian, (which is the Tea Party make-up) would be akin to spitting in the wind at this point, given the fact that the Tea Party has yet to structure itself as a national political party. Therefore, running “as a Republican” would allow a brand of sorts, and an ideology which would not be anathema to the core beliefs of the fiscally conservative, constitutional based Tea Party. It is akin to the “Blue Dog” moderate conservative Democrats who ran in 2008 and joined the ranks of the majority Democrats. The difference lay in the lack of a cohesive movement on the part of the Blue Dogs, which, the end result was a partisan paring of those Blue Dogs with the rank and file Democrats. The Tea Party members of Congress, however, are not necessarily ready to run in lockstep with Party Leadership – they have a mandate that is not by political party rather by a revolution of sorts that includes all Americans.

The Tea Party Revolution:

An op-ed piece in the Hampshire Gazette, a newspaper with roots in the Pioneer Valley of Massachusetts, and the city of Northampton, which, one would think, would be the very bastion of progressive thought. Massachusetts after all, was one of the few States in the Union that did not follow the rest of the nation in 2010 and elect either Republican’s or Tea Party members to Congress and/or higher State offices. It is not so much that those Tea Party members or Republican’s were not on the ballot, they were, in droves, it was the fact that Massachusetts Republican’s and Tea Party Members alike did not have the political operation in force that was necessary to put one over the top – one has to understand, (even with redistricting about to take place, due to the loss of one Congressional Seat), that those who did run, came within points of toppling Democrat incumbents who had been entrenched for decades. That fact alone, coupled with a lack of experience and political intelligence, should have those in the Bay State and elsewhere on notice – the movement has legs.

The Gazette Article written by Dr. Jay Fleitman (a 2010 Republican Candidate for the MA2 Congressional District), discussed the Tea Party in real Massachusetts terms. Massachusetts one must understand has a long history of producing “radicals” who go on to provoke “political uprisings” and over the long haul, “change the political landscape”. Dr. Fleitman does justice to the Tea Party, noting where the various groups are (everywhere in Massachusetts), and draws from his personal campaign experience to paint a valid picture of the Tea Party Movement. Beyond Tea Party caricatures is a must read for those who would look to further understanding the “movement”. For that is what the Tea Party really is – a movement with political consequences. Dr. Fleitman in his closing, speaks to the American “revolution” of the 1960’s and the change effected by that movement, and does, for the first time, place that moniker on the Tea Party movement – a movement that is political in nature and has, to date, already affected change in the political landscape, and with continued growth, will continue to do so over the next decades.


Abbie Hoffman, wrapped in the U.S. Flag - image Bapfn.org

In closing, Dr. Jay has a point, and the fact that economics have driven most Revolutions from the original Boston “Tea Party” (a taxing revolution that led to a new nation), to the rejection of economics by the 1960’s hippies (Abby Hoffman, a Worcester Native, wrote the tome: “Steal This Book” – available on Amazon.com on Amazon.comwhich defined the anti-establishment movement that shaped the ideology and minds of those who now sit in the Halls of Congress. As the Tea Party continues to move forward, one must agree with Dr. Jay Fleitman assessment, those of us who witnessed the “revolution of the 1960’s, are indeed fortunate to witness a second political revolution in our lifetime - That of the Tea Party.
It is not without some caution one must view the hyperbole against the Tea Party considering it is often derided by the left, the right, and the press.

Congratulations, Dr. Jay Flietman (R-MA) – Hampshire Gazette Runs First Column by Fleitman – Topic Instate Tuition

Dr. Jay Fleitman photo: Hampshire Gazette

Dr. Jay Fleitman, who ran in the Republican Primary in 2010 for the MA2 district against Richard Neal, took the time out of his busy schedule to write a column for the Hampshire Gazette, one of Western Massachusetts largest daily newspapers. The first column touches on the subject of instate tuition for illegal immigrants as proposed by Govenor Duval Patrick and is available hereat gazettenet. It is well worth the read.

One can hope that Dr. Fleitman will consider reentering the political arena, as an opponent of the current (redistricting possibilities) MA2 Congressional Representative, Democrat Richard Neal. To learn more about where Dr. Fleitman stands on the issues, visit jayfleitman.com.

Thank you Dr. Jay Fleitman – Candidate for Congress Hampden 2nd Congressional District

Dr. Jay Flietman, a Northampton physician, deserves the gratitude of the people of the Hampden 2nd district, for giving of his time and his treasure in order to run for office. Dr. Fleitman was nothing short of gracious in his approach to the campaign, as was his opponent and the eventual winner of the primary, Tom Wesley, a Navy Veteran and businessman. Both candidates had never run for public office, yet, the campaigns were professional, and did not dissolve into negativity, which is critical to avoid in the Bay State.

It is men (and women) like Dr. Flietman, who put their lives on hold for the “rest of us”, in order to try and help the country, knowing that they will be taking a personal and financial risk, during the election as well as if elected to a state or federal office (as it means a huge cut in pay). Therefore, to Dr. Flietman, a heartfelt thank you and kudos’ on a job well done in your quest to oust Richard Neal (D-MA) from an office he has held for 12 terms (24 years). Although some may argue that the odds are against a Republican from Northampton, (or Hopedale - more on that later), it was and remains, a better than possible safe bet that, yes indeed, Massachusetts is adept at producing miracles, and with the help of dedicated community leaders such as Dr. Fleitman, who has participated in the process, on a scale not seen in decades, made it a joy for those who take pride in our nation, and get out and vote, an up to recently, rare opportunity to have a real choice at the polls.

MA 4th District Congressional Candidate, Sean Bielat, Get’s Boost from Conservative Pundit Michelle Malkin – Implications for Massachusetts

Fox News Commentator, Best Selling Author and Conservative Political Pundit, Michelle Malkin, recently weighed in on a Massachustts Congressional Race – the Race for the 4th District against incumbent Barney Frank. Yesterday, Ms. Malkin put the following post up on her website, Michellemalkin.com: Boot Barney Frank: Support GOP challenger Sean Bielat”

In most election years, Conservative Republicans from Massachusetts, have had to fight tooth and nail to even get notice in the local paper, let alone national media – Ms. Malkin’s decision to highlight Mr. Beilat speaks to the understanding by those outside of the Commonwealth of Massachustts that incumbent Democrats are extremely vulnerable and finally, supporting Massachusetts candidates is not a “waste of time or treasure”.

Mr. Beilat, a marine, family man, and perhaps most critical to his electability, a former Democrat who had recently decided enough was enough, not only switched parties, but moved into Barney Frank’s district to run for Congress. Mr. Bielat has had a long history with Congress, dating back to his days as a Congressional Page. He comes from a long-line of Democrats, and in all likelihood, did not make the decision to change political affiliation easily. It is, with those who have family members of that particular political affiliation, who are treated as somewhat “treasonous” if one deviates from the chosen family ideology. That said, Mr. Beilat’s background as a former Democrat will, undoubtedly, appeal to those 4th district Democrats and Independents who lean Democrat, and are thinking: “Where’s the candidate we can vote for and identify with? – Other than Barney Frank?”

Now they know – which makes the 4th District Race extremely interesting, and Ms. Malkin’s support essential as it will garner much needed cash to wage the final battle against a deeply entrenched Barney Frank.

Other races that are of interest that should be receiving national exposure in Massachusetts are:

The Hampden second, Richard Neal’s District: Dr. Jay Fleitman and Mr. Tom Wesley will square off in the September 14th Primary. Although it is obvious that this blog endorses Dr. Flietman (for reasons previously stated here), the race for the Hampden 2nd is perhaps more imperative than the 4th district, and therefore, its candidates, both accomplished, deserve recognition as they go forward in their battle against Charles’ Rangel’s chosen successor: Congressman Richard Neal. How much trouble is Neal in? Bill Clinton is allegedly coming in to bail him out. Past President visiting this neck of the woods (Western Massachusetts) for any reason are rarities.

Other districts deserving of national interest: The MA 3, the MA 5, the MA6, and the MA 10th. There are six districts in the Commonwealth that offer the nation competitive races. Therefore, a Thank you Michelle Malkin, for highlighting a Massachusetts Candidate as viable, and here’s hoping like-minded pundits will do the same for the other races, specifically the Hampden 2nd, where Richard Neal is slated for retirement.

More on Dr. Jay Fleitman: Jayfleitman.com

More on Tom Wesley Tomwesley.com

Progressive Democrats in Denial – Local Press Attempts to Reshape Narrative on Public Angst and GOP in Massachusetts

Dr. Jay Flietman - Running the Ground game Against Richard Neal - MA Hamdpen Second - image Jay Fleitman Blog

An interesting article in the Northampton Gazette , entitled “Shifting Ground: Local Republicans are energized, Democrats feisty as fall elections approach”, speaks about the political outlook in the fall elections, specifically in Massachusetts.

The author begins the article by noting the issues that are on the minds of the public: the building of a mosque at ground zero in New York, Rupert Murdoch’s donation to the Republican Governors Association and finally an aide to President Obama criticizing Progressive Democrats. The economy, including the fact that 500,000 new unemployment claims were filed last week, (with article published Friday, August 20th, news of increased jobs claims available day before), the angst over immigration and health care reform were not mentioned at all.

The use of Rupert Murdoch and Fox News as having made a rather large donation to the Republican Governor’s Association is interesting as it is basically a “call to action” for those on the left who tune in to MSNBC. Other, more informed news consumers, understand that Murdoch gives to both political parties, leaning to the left in the 2008 elections with the with the likes of then Presidential candidate, John Edwards urging Democrats to reject money from Murdoch.

Additionally, no word on the sixth Presidential “get-away” across the state on Martha’s Vineyard where George Bush “Miss Me Yet”, t-shirts are selling like “hot cakes”.

The article does nicely outline the differences in political think within the Democrat Party – with the battle between “conservative” and Progressive Democrats highlighted. The author quotes the President of the 100,000 strong PDA (Progressive Democrats of America) as saying nothing should be taken for granted and furthering the fact that Progressives want to make the national party more progressive.

He goes on to cite the 4th Districts, Barney Frank:

U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, of Massachusetts' 4th Congressional District, warns that progressive Democrats upset with the party's conservative members should try to defeat them in primaries - but only in safe Democratic districts, not ones that could be taken by a Republican.
In a recent interview with Congressional Quarterly, Frank added that if progressives have a choice between a conservative Democrat and a Republican in November, they should vote for the Democrat "but stick voodoo pins in him ... that relieves your frustration and helps public policy."

The Massachusetts 2nd District is also highlighted, with Richard Neal (D) being seen as “Safe” – in fact all but one Massachusetts district is seen as safe by political pundits who quote the “Cook Report”, a Washington Based political publication. Although the Cook Report bases its bi-partisan analysis on reports from those in the “know” in political circles in states where they may not have intelligence on the ground, one has to note the absence of any polling, outside of the Governor’s race, by firms other than those hired by candidates for internal polling purposes.

If all was “rosy” so to speak, there would be no need for Bill Clinton to come to Springfield to stump for Neal, nor, for that matter, Barney Frank to open a a campaign office in Newton of all places.. (Only two of many instances taking place across the Bay State.)

The Hamden 2nd, where Neal has run virtually unopposed (the true focus of this article), in decades, now has Republican’s vying for his seat, and they have the ground game on. In fact, newly former Democrats (those must be the “conservative Democrats to which the PDA refers), have “jumped ship” to the Republican side – which began with Scott Brown, and has carried through to district races. Democrat held seats “safe” in Massachusetts? Hardly.

Dr. Jay Flietman, who is running against Richard Neal, is highlighted in the Gazette article. It may be because Fleitman is the “hometown” Republican, a man who sat on the Board of Health in Northampton until relinquishing his seat to campaign against Neal. The fact that Fleitman was able to get to the Board of Health in Northampton (which is similar in political think to Amherst and Cambridge (see additional progressives quoted in the article, with one moderate community college professor thrown in who had voted for McCain) speaks volumes on the ability of “Dr.Jay” to appeal to a broad spectrum of voters, including Democrats. Jay Fleitman will face Tom Wesley is the upcoming primary on September 13th. There are multiple Republican’s running in all but one, one district in Massachusetts.

The question remains, how much clout does the press, or Progressives, for that matter, have in shaping the narrative on this mid-term? One has to factor in media, in general, and where consumers are going to get their news. The highest rated radio talk shows in Massachusetts include Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck and locally Howie Carr of WRKO fame, Fox News (although much maligned) takes the top spot in cable wars on a weekly basis (See Cable News Ratings), coming close in viewership to the national network outlets who, at one time dominated evening news broadcasts. A recent New York Times article, noted broadcast was down for all networks, by range of 4 to 6 percent To networks that, in the late 1990’s had 10 million viewers per night, the fall to cable is telling.

Consumers are no longer sitting back and waiting for their national or local news anchor to tell them what is up – they are literally “Googleing” for verification. Blogs, as well as alternative news organizations, including international sources, are now being used in an effort to get the “scoop”.

Therefore, the Progressives of America have their work cut out for them. For that matter, so does Bill Clinton. Although highly popular in Massachusetts, Richard Neal, is rather lackluster, more so this season than any other. Will these races be a walk in the park for those who rise to the top of the ticket after the primary? No - but these candidates are better prepared to fight the Democrats on their own terms – they may not have the SEIU out in force, (who’s members were quoted in the Brown election as having been paid to support Coakley, but were voting for Brown), nor the “star power” of a Bill Clinton, but what they do have is the ability to connect with the voters, regardless of party.

Therefore races will be close, in the vein of Scott Brown close – 2 to 3 points were predicted in his “win” over Coakley, a slightly conservative number.

Pollsters to trust: Public Policy Polling a firm known to lean Democrat, but who, in the past, especially in recent special elections, has been spot on. For a skewed view of how well a favorite candidate (out of Massachusetts) might be doing, Real Clear Politics offers a combination of polls, to come up with an average.

The people have a choice, in the Hampden 2nd – between an entrenched, straight party line, politicians who is obviously influenced by Progressives, as opposed to the majority of Democrats (one Richard Neal), or a knowledgeable and likeable physician from Northampton, Dr. Jay Flietman who seeks to bring a different, fiscally conservative narrative to Washington.

Herein lays the crux, “likeable”, it will boil down to retail politics, on all level, and the more appealing the candidate is to the masses now (progressive think), the better the chance of besting an incumbent.

As of now, one must respectfully agree to disagree on the notion that all seats, with the exception of the 10th District, are “safe”, rather, with Democrats playing defense for the first time in decades, it appears that these districts are up for grabs, and as conditions worsen, along with the rhetoric that all is well with Democrats from the local news, the face of Massachusetts is on the verge of a substantial shift in political think.

Richard Neal (D-MA Hampden 2nd) Holds Pricey Fundraiser out of His District – Neal is up for Reelection in 2010.

Representative Richard Neal - campaigning hard to win the Rangel Gavel must first win the trust of the Hampden 2nd

The Hampden Second District is not often in the news, it is one of the more quiet districts in the Commonwealth, and Democrat Richard Neal, its 11 term Congressional Representative, tends to keep a lower profile. Neal only appears, like clockwork, every two years, when the residents are sent mailers touting the dangers of Republicans and Neal’s accomplishments. The local press begins to run a plethora of stories on Neal, who, up until this time in his career, has not faced a serious challenge. Times have changed, and Neal has stiff competition from Dr. Jay Fleitman of Northampton, Flietman, who as a Republican, has been active in Northampton politics, made his campaign official when he delivered or 3800 certified signatures weeks ahead of the State Deadline. It is the fact that Flietman is not only a Republican who is well-received in one of the most liberal cities in the District, but that he also has a sensible approach to the issues facing the district as well as the nation.

The Globe's report on Neal’s Lobbyist packed fundraiser was based on his quest to take the Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee, recently made vacant by Charles Rangel. Neal needs the money to donate to Democrat Candidates as well as the Democrat Congressional Committee in order to garner favor with individual reps, so that when the time comes, he’ll have bought enough votes to sustain any serious challengers to the chair.

Neal faces two obstacles to the high seat on the Committee that governs our taxes: one the Democrats must maintain a majority in order for Neal to stand a chance of succeeding, and two, he must still be a Congressional Representative in November. Both of these obstacles are looking insurmountable, with anti-Washington, anti-incumbent and anti-Democrat sentiment running high nationwide, and in no place is this evident more than the Hampden 2nd district of Massachusetts.

In reviewing the special January 19th, 2010 Senate election Map shown below, the Hampden second (noted by the City of Springfield in blue) shows a sea of red, as the District leaned heavily towards Brown. Three areas where Coakley fared well were Springfield, Amherst and Holyoke - the rest - not so much.


Results from January 2010 Special election - Hampden Second runs from the hill towns west (in red) to Worcester

Can a physician from Northampton do to Neal what Brown did to Coakley? – The answer to that question is a resounding yes. With the exception of an increase in articles in the local news (which is anticipated by voters with Neal’s history of showing up every two years), he has about as much name recognition, perhaps less than Dr. Jay. The Boston Globe article talks about Neal as being bi-partisan, however, his voting record in the Congress appears to contradict that claim, as from day 1, he has voted specifically along party lines. Neal is going to have to campaign hard, and it means spending on advertising, announcing the fact that he exists on the one hand, and that he wants to be reelected on the other.


Dr. Jay Fleitman, Republican running against Richard Neal, on a trip to the Capital



It will come down to a matter of who the voters are going to trust to end the spending, the corruption and reign in the deficit. The old allegiance to one party in Massachusetts is gone. The electorate is heavily Independent, and enthusiasm among Democrats is at an all-time low. There are at least 5, perhaps 6, very competitive house races out of the 10 seats currently held by Democrats in Massachusetts.

To learn more about the candidates:
Jay Fleitman for Congress

Neal for Congress

Gallop: Republicans Lead Congressional Ballot by 6% - Larger Story Independents Voter Preference

A Gallop survey released todayshows an “historic” lead by Republicans on the Generic Congressional ballot. When one reads further into the data, the most stunning portion of this survey is the Independent Congressional Voting Preferences: which widens the Republican lead by 13 points. In states such as the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, this trend can be particularly disturbing to those Democrats who are up for reelection in 2010. Almost every Congressional district is in play, including high profile Democrats, Barney Frank (4th district) faces rising Republican Star, Sean Bielat) and Richard Neal (Hampden 2nd)faces popular Northampton Mass. Republican, Dr. Jay Fleitman. In all instances, Democrats, for the first time in Massachusetts history are facing multiple Republican challengers in all districts. The independent vote in Massachusetts, and like states, where independents either equal one party or another or far outweigh both with the total electorate, will make be the deciding factor in many 2010 elections. (Massachusetts as of 2008 had independents at 51% of the voting bloc.) This cannot bode well for State Democrats who will hold their convention June 4th.

Although pundits consistently point to the 12th Congressional District win of Democrat, Mark Critz, which is not without some guile – Critz basically, ran as a Republican in order to gain the seat. (See screenshots of campaign pages where issues are Republican driven issues.) Should this trend continue among voters, as outlined in the Gallop survey, the makeup of the Congress, and possibly the Senate will be greatly changed in November.

Richard Neal (D-MA) To Vote for Health Care Reform – Richard Neal is Up for Re-election in 2010

According to the Atlanta Journal Constitution, Massachusetts, 2nd Hampden Congressional Representative, Richard Neal, intends to vote for the Health Care Reform bill. Neal was one of the House members who were originally opposed to the Senate version due to opposition by Catholic bishops to federally funded abortion. He voted for the House version once the Stupak amendment was added. Neal has a 50% score with pro-abortion activists (John Kerry scores 100%). Apparently, abortion is no longer an issue of concern for Neal, as he has changed his mind, and will now vote for the Senate version.

Opposition to the Senate version is based upon budgetary concerns, the elimination of the Medicare Advantage program, which covers wellness benefits for our seniors, and the impending taxes that will begin immediately once the bill is signed. Neal’s voting record has been strictly along party lines for his entire career, so a yes vote for the Obama's Health Care Bill, should come as no surprise to anyone.

Neal, who is up for re-election this year, faces stiff opposition from two Republican challengers: Dr. Jay Fleitman and Tom Wesley.


To reach Richard Neal and voice ones opinion of his decision to vote Yes on Obama’s Health Care Bill: Washington office: 202) 225-5601 (202) 225-8112 fax, Springfield: (413) 785-0325 (413) 747-0604 fax and Milford: (508) 634-8198 (508) 634-8398 fax

To learn more about what you can do in November:

Visit: Dr. Jay Fleitman for Congress

or Tom Wesley for Congress.

Richard Neal faces no known opposition from a Democrat.

Independents are able to vote in the Primary for any party affiliation
Massachusetts Primary: September 14, 2010

Democrats wishing to change party affiliation to Independent or Republican may do so by Wed., August 25th.

Regardless of Political affiliation, anyone can vote for any candidate in the general election. Therefore, a registered Democrat can vote for a Republican in any general election, they do not have to change party affiliation in order to vote in November, 2010. The only time someone has to change their political party is when they wish to vote in a different political party's primary.

Rasmussen – Massachusetts Ramps Up Independence – Trouble for Patrick as well as Congressional Incumbents

Pollsters - Massachsuetts 2010 and 2012? image: blog optimism for America

A new poll released by Rasmussen on March 8th, reveals that the Commonwealth has no longer is blindly following a liberal bent; rather, the independent streak appears to be growing stronger. In this particular poll the crosstabs are revealing - the Gubernatorial Election is tight, with Patrick leading with 35%, GOP Frontrunner, Charlie Baker with 32% and Democrat turned Independent Cahill down to 19% - the kicker: 14% of those polled are currently undecided. The undecided’s, incidentally, are often aligned with name recognition and or a favorable rating, which in Baker’s case, a startling 28% of those polled have no opinion (meaning they have not heard of or have sufficient knowledge of Charlie Baker). In a match-up with Patrick, only 13% view him very favorably, while Cahill comes in at 10% and Baker at 17%. The Governors current overall approval (includes strongly and somewhat approves) is at 33%. With independent candidates coming out strong “out-of-the-gate” and normally finishing in the 6 percentile, the 3 point gap that Separate Baker and Patrick should close quickly over the summer and into the fall, as long as Baker’s staff makes sure that his name becomes “household” across the Commonwealth. That 28% could conceivably push Baker ahead of Patrick in double digits.

Political campaigns are all about branding – 1 the brand of the Candidate and, fortunately for Baker, the brand of the Political Party in general. If Baker introduces himself to the Commonwealth, remains upbeat in any advertising, he will minimize the threat from Cahill, and Patrick will be, as they say, history.

The Kennedy state no more – 58% of those polled feel that the Kennedy dynasty is over, and the health care issue is still a driving force in the Bay State, with 31% strongly approving and 40% strongly opposing, on this issue Bay Stater’s know where they stand, only 2% were “unsure” (refused). When adding in those on the “somewhat fence”, the support Obama’s Health Care plan jumps to 46% and those that oppose to 52%. What one must keep in mind – this is Massachusetts. The Presidents Handling of Health Care Reform: 19% believe he’s done an excellent job, while 44% believe he has done poorly. That is stunning. Additionally, Massachusetts voters believe that the Insurance Companies would do a better job that the Federal Government, 50% to 42%.

Obama’s overall approval rating in the Commonwealth (includes the somewhats), is at 44%! With a disapproval rating of 46%, which tells us that Massachusetts has joined the rest of the nation (Gallop latest Obama approval: 46%).

All that aside, those who are considering a Congressional run, or are now invested in a run against a current Congressional representative, get a serious boost – 38% of those polled feel that the current representative in Congress deserves to be reelected – 38% feel that they do not. This particular question has those undecided’s in-line with Baker’s numbers: 24% are unsure. (Branding). When asked if the nation would be better off if the incumbent were to be defeated – 53% of Bay Stater’s believe that the entire Massachusetts Democrat Controlled congressional legislation should be sent packing, while 25% support keeping them in office, and 22% remain sitting on the fence. In reviewing the data on both previous poll questions, the percentage of those sitting on the fence is a 2 point difference. This means that those Republicans or Independents running in each district better start knocking on doors and introducing themselves; to everyone in the district. Instead of holding barbeque's and cocktail parties, it would behoove those that want a clear shot at making history, to get in the trenches and get to know their future constituents.

Almost every single congressional district in Massachusetts is in play, and two in particular, the 2nd Hampden and the 4th, are going to be the districts to watch. Those candidates that have an independent streak, will perform the best in these two districts, right now, that’s Jay Fleitman in the Hampden 2nd, and Earl Sholley in the 4th (excellent review here: at Massachusetts Election 2010.

In conclusion, Massachusetts which has always been dubbed “Safe Democrat” and the “Bluest State” is changing. That change comes from the growing number of independents, or registered unenrolleds, who will vote for the person, not the party – it does not matter that Democrats currently outnumber Republican’s, it matters which candidate (or incumbent) is able to convince the majority of voters that they deserve the nod. In 2010, Massachusetts, against all odds (referring to the media’s take) may indeed shock the nation once again.

Dr. Jay Fleitman resigns from NoHo Board of Health to Focus On Race Against Democrat Richard Neal

The Daily Hampshire Gazette has reported that Dr. Jay Fleitman, GOP candidate for the 2nd Hampden Congressional District, has stepped down from his long-held position on the Board of Health. Fleittman, who practices pulmonary medicine, is a rarity in the City of Northampton, locally dubbed “NoHo”. The city is home to Smith College, and has a heavy liberal bent, yet Jay Fleitman is not only well received, but a respected member of the community despite being a Republican.

Flietman made his decision to run for against Neal early in the game (pre-Scott Brown), Neal, a 20 year veteran of Congress, had been unchallenged for decades, and has been confident in his position, enough so that he has not produced one piece of legislation. Like clockwork, Neal’s staff sends mailers out every two years to constituents warning about the evils of Republicans, and/or touting what he has accomplished in the district. One of the favorite Neal claims is that he has, time and again, “saved Westover Air Reserve Base”, which is one of the most strategic basis in the nation, and has been since World War Two. (A bit of Al Gorism can be found in Neal at times.) Perhaps the two biggest reasons to take a hard look at Flietman as an alternative to Neal are:

1) Neal has consistently voted with the Democrats in Congress, never crossing the aisle, regardless of the worth of a particular bill. His latest “Town Hall” on health care in August, was held in Worcester (which is part of the District, but far from the major cities of Springfield, Holyoke and Chicopee). He defended the Congressional Brand of Health Care Reform over the objection of his constituents.

2) Most recently, disgraced Democrat Charles Rangel was forced to resign his Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee. Rangel’s choice of replacement: Richard Neal. Neal did not get the nod from the House, rather the gavel went to a Michigan Democrat, but Neal intends, according to the several sources, to fight for the post, although he must first make it through the November elections. The reason one cites this aspect of Neal’s career is that a recommendation to a post by someone who is so corrupt, as a Democrat, that they are forced out, speaks volumes.


However, the question remains, will a Republican be able to oust long-term Democrat Congressional Representative in 2010. The answer is a resounding yes, with some caveats. The candidate must be able to connect to voters on several levels, be a populist, independent minded individual. Fleitman completes this profile admirably. In addition, his candidacy was announced pre-Scott Brown, which, in this mind, no matter which district, speaks volumes about the sincerity of the candidate and the will of the candidate to take on the “odds”.

This is not to say that the bevy of candidates coming forth from the woodwork to run across the Commonwealths districts are not worthy, it is just that decisions were made post-Scott Brown, the congressional districts analyzed ad nauseum in order to determine if a “Republican” win would be feasible. It also speaks volumes about courage and conviction of one’s principals and abilities. One must face the facts, Scott Brown was and remains Scott Brown, someone who at times distanced himself from the GOP, an independent minded thinker that did not run because he looked at the Commonwealth and past races and thought – I can do this because so and so won the race.

That’s one of the finer points about Jay Fleitman (among other candidates who are running in several other districts), he ran because he felt he needed to do something. He “manned-up” before it was a popular thing to do and looking at all the angles, he’s just independent enough to appeal to the voters of the Hampden 2nd in a big way. One can bet that residents of the 2nd Hampden may be treated to yet another postcard in 2010 from Richard Neal.

First Dodd, now Patrick Kennedy To Retire – Massachustts Finds Multiple GOP Challengers to Democrat Incumbents.

Rhode Island Congressional RepresentativePatrick Kennedy, has become the latest to take early retirement, rather than seek re-election this term. Kennedy, who, according to a recent poll, has a 35% approval rating. Kennedy cited his father’s death as well as his own issues with substance abuse, as reasons for his retirement. Kennedy had held the seat since 1995. The last New England retirement announcement came from embattled Connecticut Senator, Chris Dodd less than a month ago.

One has to wonder who’s next? Perhaps a High Profile Congressional Representative from Massachusetts will consider retirement a better option than defeat. Democrat Incumbents face multiple challengers in districts across Massachusetts. According to an article in the Worcester Telegram : Democrat James McGovern of the Mass. 3rd district who is seeking an 8th term, faces challenges from Republicans Robert Delle, Marty Lamb, Robert Chipmen, and Patrick J. Barron. In the Hampden Second, Richard Neal, who has held the seat since 1989, faces challenges from Dr. Jay Flietman of Northampton, Thomas Wesley and Thomas McCarthy. In the 1st Congressional District, held by John Olver a Congressional Representative since 1991, two Republican challengers, Jeffrey Donnelly and Timothy McLaughlin have thrown their hats into the ring.

Over in the 5th District, Nikki Tsongas faces challenges from Republicans Jon Golnick and Sam Meas as well as independent candidate Dale Brown. In the 6th, Teirney will face a challenge from Republican David Sukoff While over in the 4th District, Barney Frank is facing challengers from Republican’s, Independents and Democrats. Republican’s Earl Henry Sholley, Keith Messina and Sean Bielat have entered the race, with one more Republican currently on the fence. Susan Allen, and independent and Rachel Brown, a Democrat are also vying for the 4th Congressional District seat. Rumors of Frank’s retirement have surfaced again in recent weeks; with Dodd’s retirement, and now Kennedy’s, it is anyone’s guess at this point if Frank will stay in the race, even though he’s pulled papers. Republican’s and Democrats have until May 4th to file papers with the Secretary of State while Independents can file up to August 3rd.

In the past, the voters of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts saw few if any contested Congressional races, this year, they have multiple choices. What is of special interest in the sheer number of Republican’s who have entered races in a state where the GOP has been long considered all but extinct. Also of note, a good percentage of those running, began their campaigns prior to Scott Brown’s announcement to run for U.S. Senate. This belies the common media misconception that Brown’s win has emboldened Republican’s to run. What Brown’s success did was give them a boost and more determination. Massachusetts is normally the last state of interest in a general election nationally, but one can bet 2010 will be different.

Massachusetts – No longer the Bluest State - Boston Globe Headlines: Mass. Democrats Brace for Republican Candidates in 2010

Dr. Jay Fleitman - Candidate 2nd Hampden photo 2bpblogspot

Earl Sholley running against Barney Frank, MA 4th District - photo Sholleyforcongress.us

TheBoston Globe article on the Democrats who hold a stranglehold on Congressional seats in the Commonwealth being concerned they may be at risk due to Scott Browns win of the Senate Seat is of interest, although the main point is an error. Brown won the seat on his own merits, in a campaign which was executed by grassroots efforts with impeccable precision. This was mainly due to his overall appeal to the general population; one which is currently sick and tired of those who would be “rock stars”. Brown appeared to be “one of us” not one of them and was humble in his approach. (It is no surprise, however, that the media has taken Brown’s talents and turned him into a “celebrity” – virtually overnight. Nevertheless, Brown’s focus will be the will of the people, although pundits are busy trying to marginalize Brown’s win, as it relates to Obama, it is truly a rejection of the entire progressive approach to government – one to which Brown does not subscribe.)

That said, the article errs mainly due to the fact that Brown’s rise has nothing to do with the fact that Congressional Democrats are at risk and have been, long before Brown announced his candidacy. There is a new sense in Massachusetts that enough is enough. This antipathy towards the Democrats began with Deval Patrick, and the almost daily corruption on Beacon Hill. This angst has been aided by news reports of Barney Frank (Massachusetts 4th District), Richard Neal (Hampden Second), Niki Tsongas (Massachusetts 5th), James McGovern, (Massachusetts 3rd) and William Delahunt (Massachusetts 10th), all of whom are up for re-election in 2010, getting behind the President one-hundred percent, and voting straight party line, for years, not just since Obama became president.

With each budget in the red, with each new tax, with each new major program, the same old group can be seen in nightly newscasts or daily papers pounding home the message that they have a) experience due to the length of time they have held a certain seat, and, b) as a result they know better. Nothing brought this home more than the Town-Hall meetings held during the Health Care debate this past summer. With Massachusetts Congressional Democrats holding meetings where they were visibly uncomfortable facing their constituents. It was so difficult that Neal and McGovern had to team up to face the music, yet they went back to Washington oblivious of what they had heard from their constituents. The end result was a wake up call to the majority of the electorate. This was not the first time that the electorate started to take a close hard look at all elected officials in Massachusetts and the length of time they held an office and how they vote - it began to take shape immediately after Deval Patrick’s first year as Governor and it has snowballed ever since.

Republican candidates have been there all along, however, in the world outside the Bay State, any Republican (or someone running as a Republican) was basically pooh-poohed as spitting into the wind, so to speak, because Massachusetts votes Democrat. Then, about a year ago, (while the outside world was not watching) individuals began to form campaigns to run against those entrenched, lockstep Democrats who still feel the public has no other choice. In fact, every Congressional Seat mentioned above cannot be considered “safe Democrat” because there are several where campaigns are already well established, with grassroots organizations in place. Now, with 2010 here, the level of interest in retiring entrenched Massachusetts politician’s and replacing them with “citizen legislators” is extraordinarily high. These are not mentioned in the Globe article.

Richard Neal now faces two contenders for his seat, one of which, Dr. Jay Fleitman, another independent thinker, has had a campaign in place for the past year. Fleitman is one of those citizens one meets and instantly understands that it is not about “position” it is about the people. In other words, he has stepped forward, to offer himself to the service of the Commonwealth and the nation, in order to challenge a Congressman, who the district hears from every two years. Each election Neal recycles mailers proclaiming an impending social security crisis, should he not be reelected. The people are not buying this anymore. Nor will they fall for the “change of heart” tactic; the seat in the Hampden 2nd is far from safe. Jay Fleitman's website is www.jayfleitman.com, those Unenrolled, Republican and yes, even Democrats are already aware of Dr. Fleitman, and what he has to say about a range of issues, without making excuses or sounding like a “cookie cutter” party-line elitist (referring to Republicans). He’s another “one of us”.

The "big kahuna" of the Commonwealth’s Democrat Congressional Delegation, Barney Frank, is perhaps the one who is most at risk - this besides the fact that every single political pundit sees him as holding his seat, until such time as he feels the need to retire. Think again. In fact, Frank is facing challenges from his own party, let alone those running as Republicans. The most likely to give Frank the proverbial boot is a man who has run against Frank in the past. One who does not necessarily fit the Republican model, (or any model), one who looks to the Constitution and has a keen grasp of that document. Earl Sholley, www.sholleyforcongress.us, is an individual, somewhat quirky, not terribly charismatic, but sound, sensible and with an ideological approach to governing that he has held fast to for decades. Sholley, of all the candidates, does have some baggage (in political think), however, the candidate he faces has more, and as this man goes door to door throughout the 4th district, he finds discontent and volunteers. This did not happen overnight, or as a result of another candidates rise, but due to hard work and an unshakable belief in the Constitution, the public and the need for reform. Both of these candidates are the least likely to be called “rock stars”, yet, that’s precisely their appeal.

The fact that both candidates outlined above have been able to energize volunteers based on their own ideals, and, in equal measure, the candidate they are opposing, speaks volumes about the change that is going to reshape Massachusetts into a Commonwealth that is less “blue”, and more evenly representative of all the peoples of the Bay State. Yes, the Democrats of Massachusetts have hard campaigns ahead of them, perhaps much harder than the Coakley campaign, due to the fact that those who would run have had more time to prepare than did one Scott Brown. It is going to be a wild 2010 in Massachusetts politics. One can watch the “safe Democrat” stay pretty much the same on the pundit’s websites, until say, mid-October, when the handwriting on the wall becomes abundantly clear.

Note:
The number one search on this blog: Who is running against Barney Frank, has been joined by Who is running against Richard Neal, with a majority of those inquiries coming from within Massachusetts in the past two weeks, prior to that, they were coming from all corners of the nation, with a few hits here and there inside the Bluest State. Barney Frank inquiries average about 100 unique hits per day. (Which grew exponentially over the past week, to 300), which means that an investment, in time, talent and that all important cash needed to brand a candidate, is already in the “bank” so to speak.