Iowa's senior senator Charles Grassley is rapidly becoming the Republican Party's chief obstructionist in the health care debate. The ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee is going on the offensive against President Obama and members of Congress who support comprehensive reform. In a conference call Tuesday, Senator Grassley told Iowa reporters, "I don't think it's going to be possible to work it out with the administration because they're all over the field - all over the ball park."

This latest statement demonstrates the level of partisanship our senior senator has brought to the current health care debate. If anyone is "all over the field"- it's Senator Grassley. Here are just a few examples:

In a statement last week, Senator Grassley's spokesperson accused Iowa Congressman Bruce Braley of putting his "party duties as Vice Chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee ahead of Iowans." In fact, Congressman Braley fought his political party's leadership to secure more equitable reimbursement rates for Iowa regarding public health insurance plans. Due to Congressman Braley's work, Iowa health care providers will finally be compensated fairly for their work.

Senator Grassley, on the other hand, admitted to putting his party duties ahead of Iowans. Days before his attack on Congressman Braley he told reporter Chuck Todd (NBC), "I'm negotiating for Republicans." Todd asked the Senator if he gets what he wants from negotiations, if he'd be willing to be one of 3 or 4 Republicans who vote yes for reform. Senator Grassley said, "Absolutely not. And I told the President that a week ago Thursday and I told [committee chairman] Max Baucus that over a period of three or four months....In fact, let me build on what you said, and why I say that I wouldn't be. I'm negotiating for Republicans."

Lies on healthcare for seniors: At an August town hall meeting in Winterset, Senator Grassley told constituents, "you have every right to fear," when asked about the end-of-life planning provisions in House Resolution 3200. He later added that, "we should not have a government program that determines you're going to pull the plug on grandma."

And on August 23rd when Senator Grassley was asked by reporter Bob Schieffer (CBS 'Face the Nation'), "you're not saying that this legislation (H.R. 3200) would pull the plug on grandma?" Senator Grassley admitted, "I know the Pelosi bill doesn't intend to do that," adding later, "It won't do that."

Senator Grassley can't even agree with...himself: The clearest indication that Senator Grassley is "all over the field" is the manner in which he closed his Tuesday conference call with Iowa reporters. Not 30 seconds after saying, "I don't think it's going to be possible to work it out with the administration," Grassley stepped back to say, "But, yes, I do believe it's possible to reach an agreement."

"The whole nation is holding their breath, waiting to see what proposals Senator Grassley's committee will produce. Yet his recent comments make it unclear whether the Senator truly plans to be a part of these negotiations. There is just no telling what he'll say next," SEIU Local 199 President Cathy Glasson said. "Senator Grassley could be a champion for the majority of Iowans and Americans - those who want to see a comprehensive health insurance reform bill passed. Right now, it seems he's more interested in being the champion of Republicans in Washington looking to play politics with our health care."

For months, we've been standing firm on our call for Congress to deliver a health care bill that does a few, simple things. It has to lower health care costs for patients, businesses, and governments. It has to improve the quality of care for patients. And it has to make sure that every American, regardless of who they are or how much money that make, has access to affordable care.

Today, the Senate delivered a bill that meets those goals.

The Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pension (HELP) Committee released the complete version of their health care reform bill this morning. It has all the ingredients needed to finally fix our broken system and give every American quality coverage at an affordable price.

One of the key provisions in the legislation is the inclusion of a strong public health insurance option. It would be accessible to Americans on day one, regardless of where they live. And it's completely voluntary; people who like the plan they have now can keep it, and people who don't have access to affordable health care have the choice of a public health insurance option.

The HELP Committee's bill represents a huge break from politics as usual. Finally, there's legislation in the Senate that holds private insurers accountable and gives working people peace of mind when it comes to health care.

But, already, there are members of Congress trying to water down the bill. They're trying to add provisions that will protect huge profits for insurance companies instead of cutting costs and improving care for patients.

Let's send them a reminder of how much health care costs are hurting us - the people who elected them to office. Send your medical bill to Congress today and tell them to support the HELP Committee's common sense plan for fixing health care.

In the past few days, our allies in Congress have made serious gains in health care reform. But one thing is still uncertain - whether we'll see a strong, immediate public health insurance option.

President Obama last week indicated that, in order to keep insurance companies "honest" and reduce costs, we must provide Americans with the option of a public health insurance plan.

Now it's time to convince Congress; and the strongest proof that our current health care system is broken is probably sitting on your kitchen table - your medical bills.

What are you spending on health care? Generate your own medical bill online, and send it to Congress: http://medbill.seiu.org

Today, the Senate is working on a plan for health care reform. The public health insurance option needs to be a part of it because it does three things:

• Lowers costs for individuals and families by competing side-by-side with private insurance plans
  
• Sets high standards for quality and accessibility that other plans will strive to meet
  
• Gives Americans more choice in their coverage by offering an affordable alternative to over-priced plans

After 80 years, we finally have the solution to this health care crisis in our sights. Thanks for joining us in our summer-long sprint to the finish line.

Today, SEIU President Andy Stern joined with a panel of health care advocates, insurance industry reps and other stakeholders at Sen. Baucus' second roundtable on health reform--the topic, reforming health care coverage.

During the hearing, Sen. Chuck Schumer, who's been tasked with leading the Committee's work on a public health insurance plan, played a dramatic counterweight to insurance industry representatives. (And this comes on the heels of an agreement by insurance companies to stop charging women higher premiums than men. Wonder if they're considering paying back women customers for the difference all these years?)

Schumer essentially dismantled arguments against the public health insurance plan, challenging folks squarely on the issue of transparency and competition. Ezra Klein sums up Schumer's points nicely:

Schumer went on to argue that opposition to the public plan is predicated on a high-functioning insurance market that doesn't now, and hasn't ever, existed. Private insurers, Schumer exclaimed, can't even tell you what a given treatment costs. They won't release their data on either quality or prices. This is not an elegant market that should be protected from further competitive pressures. This is a mess in desperate need of new players with new incentives. "To not have a public plan and let it compete the way [Senator Baucus] outlines in his white paper is, in my view, closeminded," said Schumer. Then he paused, and smiled, looking out over a crowd think with industry representatives. "In my view," he continued, "it may even be a little self-interested."

Schumer went on, "The bottom line is you need somebody who is not a private insurance company to be in the mix and there are many of us who feel very strongly about that... It would be giving all of you in the insurance industry an unfair advantage not to have a public plan."

SEIU President Andy Stern hammered home the fact that--despite insurance industry claims--consumers do not currently enjoy choice and competition. Stern spoke about the lack of "choice" for workers in Maine and New Hampshire, for example, who have higher costs than public workers in other states, but similar coverage.

From Andy's Twitter feed: "Senator Schumer aggressively fights for public plan. Go Chuck! Discussion on employer responsibility [sic] missing."

(And as President Stern alluded to in his tweet, stay tuned for SEIU's continuing work on shared employer responsibility. )

Look out Washington; there's a new sheriff in town.

The Journal News is reporting that Senator Max Baucus has added another link to the united front that will be pushing health care reform through Washington this year:

[Senator Charles] Schumer said this week he's been asked by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus to serve as the panel's point man supporting the administration on the issue [of a public health insurance option].

"If competition works, why not have a public entity?" said Schumer, a Democrat and New York's senior senator.

Multiple polls have confirmed that the vast majority of Americans support a public health insurance option as part of the plan to fix health care. The benefits to consumers would be substantial:

· Patients would see the exact same doctors for the exact same procedures, but at a much lower cost. By introducing a competing plan to the health care market - as well as the millions of new consumers who would be able to afford coverage for the first time - the public health insurance option would drop costs across the board almost immediately.

· Americans with pre-existing conditions would finally have access to affordable coverage. For decades, one serious illness or chronic condition has sentenced Americans to a lifetime without health insurance. Introducing a public health insurance option into the market would allow those with pre-existing conditions to buy good coverage at a price they could afford. Studies have shown that the cost of insuring those "high risk" individuals would be offset by the millions of young, healthy Americans also purchasing health insurance for the first time. It's the same principle that allows big corporations to pool their insurance risk together and pay much less per employee than their small business counterparts.

· We'd have more choices for health care - not less. Lots of anti-reform groups like to scare Americans into believing that a public health insurance option amounts to a government take over of the health care system. They tell you that, if you have good health care, you're going to lose it. Nothing could be further from the truth. Under the new plan, if you have health insurance that you like - you keep it. Period. The only change you'll see is lower premiums as the increased competition drives down costs for all consumers.

So, if a public health insurance option is a win-win-win for consumers, why is it still controversial on Capitol Hill? The answer, not surprisingly, is money. There's big money to be made in a system that overcharges for health care. And that money is paying for lobbyists that are working around the clock to protect the status quo.

That's where Senator Schumer comes in. During the coming months, as the plans for health care reform unfold, his job is to make sure Congress is looking out for patients and not profits by including a public health insurance option into the mix. Backing him up will be President Obama and the soon-to-be-Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius. And, of course, all of us.

A plan that creates more competition, lower costs, and better care - it's so simple and straightforward, only in Washington could it be controversial.

The numbers are in. A recent poll conducted by Lake Research indicates that 73% of voters want to see a public health insurance option as part of health care reform in 2009. And guess what? It's smart fiscal policy, too. From the Huffington Post :

"A public health insurance plan will have the same effect on health insurance premiums that Southwest Airlines has on airfares when it moves into a new market: all competitors lower prices. The rest of the market players have to scramble to figure out how to lower costs and increase efficiency -- that's what a competitive market is supposed to be about."

The point is to provide a choice of plans. The public health insurance plan would compete, side-by-side, with private plans. And if Medicare -- which is leaner and has lower administrative costs than private insurance -- is any indication, a public plan will promote increased competition and lower costs throughout the health care system. (And if you're looking for hard estimates, check out the Commonwealth Study, which estimated that a public option would reduce health care costs by 20%.)

What's more, the preference for a choice of a public or private plan appeals to everyone -- Republicans (63%), Democrats (77%) and Independents (79%). This week, former DNC chair Howard Dean told the Washington Times that members of Congress who oppose a public option should listen to their constituents on the issue, or else risk suffering at the polls in 2010. Judging by this latest poll, we'd say Dr. Dean is right on the mark.

Read more about the Lake Poll at the Huffington Post here.

Today, Health Care for America Now, one of SEIU's partner coalitions released the results of a poll [.pdf file] that shows broad public support for comprehensive health care reform. According to the poll, there is "intense and widespread voter support for the choice of a public health insurance plan as part of comprehensive, national health care reform."

The survey, which consisted of 800 likely voters from across the country, matched up several statements supporting and opposing a public health insurance option. Every time, voters rejected the opposition's attacks, instead favoring statements in support of the public health insurance plan.

Voters' support for comprehensive health care reform should come as no surprise as the economy continues to backslide. A report by the Kaiser Family Foundation shows that every 1% increase in unemployment leads to 1.1 million more uninsured Americans. With unemployment jumping to record highs, the health care crisis is becoming very real and very personal for millions of Americans.

The overwhelming support for a plan that includes a public health insurance option, though, is striking. In fact, the preference for a system with both public and private health insurance options extended across all demographics and political affiliations - with a large majority of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents supporting it.

Our movement helped put the health care crisis in the spotlight during the 2008 election. Three months later, it's clear that voters still feel the same sense of urgency and importance when it comes to providing quality, affordable coverage for every American.