A bill said to improve health care for veterans has been signed into law as part of the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act. Signed by Congressman Jerry McNerney (11th District), the legislation would help veterans who have suffered traumatic brain injuries.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, May 6, 2010, 9:32 AM
Posted by susan, a resident of the Pleasanton Valley neighborhood, on May 7, 2010 at 10:09 am
Here is a man who voted for THE HEALTH CARE BILL WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT WAS IN IT? Now he wants us to believe that he is reprsenting us. GIVE ME A BREAK AND THE REST OF HIS DISTRICT, NO ONE BELIEVES HIM ANYMORE. HIS CREDITABILITY IS GONE. HE REPRESENTS ONLY OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY NOT HIS DISTRICT. ITS TIME HE RETIRED.
Posted by John, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on May 7, 2010 at 1:24 pm
Thank you Mr McNerney. You're doing right by our troops. I, too, am proud to say I have supported you since your first write-in campaign.
Susan -- do you think it might be a good thing that your health insurance company can now no longer arbitrarily dump you? That you can no longer be denied for a pre-existing condition? That you can more easily access health care if you are unemployed? No?
Posted by 11th District voter, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on May 7, 2010 at 3:05 pm
Susan's right that he doesn't 'represent'our district. First, WHY does the PW lie in a headline about McNerney. This Veteran Bill HR1335 and veteran HR2898 were AUTHORED by Representative Debbie Halvorson in yes, a Dist 11..in ILLINOIS !! ! ! How about truth-telling PW. The bills were UNANIMOUS in BOTH the House AND Senate.!!
Milktoasty McNerny did NOT author, he 'signed' along with 500+ other signers!! He is not a fighter and certainly NOT for us !!
Susan is right, it's time for him to retire. He's got what he ran for...lifetime retirement. He said he didn't have insurance when he first ran. So, now he does and lifetime reitrement too !!. Pretty good for a guy tht didn't have a job, and admitted his company "never got off the ground". Now he can live the rest of his life in a style he has NOW become accustomed!
Posted by Rae, a resident of the Mohr Park neighborhood, on May 7, 2010 at 4:58 pm
Congressman McNerney absolutely *did* sponsor HR1546 "To amend title 38, United States Code, to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to establish the Committee on Care of Veterans with Traumatic Brain Injury." HR1546 became part of the comprehensive Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010 which was Bill Number S.1963 for the 111th Congress.
HR1335 was written to "amend title 38, United States Code, to prohibit the Secretary of Veterans Affairs from collecting certain copayments from veterans who are catastrophically disabled."
HR2898 was written to "amend title 38, United States Code, to provide support services for family caregivers of disabled veterans, and for other purposes."
If you had bothered to research not only HR1546, but HR 1335 and HR2998 you would have seen that they are all part of S.1963.
The Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010 is just what the name says . . . an omnibus, i.e. collection of health services that were sponsored, co-sponsored and passed by both the House and Senate.
I guess when you can't twist the facts, all you have left are name calling and lies.
Posted by Anita, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on May 8, 2010 at 7:15 am
To Those Who Favor McNerney:
If you are former military, thank you for your service to America.
However, if you are pro-McNerney because you believe he has supported Veterans, please hear me out. You may have been duped by all of the hype from the Pleasanton Weekly Editor who is unabashedly biased democrat. All of the McNerney photo-ops of him in front of Vets may be affecting your opinion.
First, who wouldn't be in favor of our Vets (except Obama who has dishonored them).?
Secondly, McNerney is a far left Democrat and Democrats in general are NOT in favor of a strong military. Obama has cut our military capability. McNerney voted for a withdrawal of our troops in Iraq at a critical time when they should have remained.
I submit that ANY conservative in office, especially David Harmer who is running to replace McNerney, would support our Vets infinitely more than McNerney and any other democrat. (despite the fact that the Pleasanton Weekly would probably refuse to publish photo-ops of any republican in front of our Vets...it would ruin the PW's biased image.)
Posted by Rae, a resident of the Mohr Park neighborhood, on May 8, 2010 at 1:59 pm
You stated: "ANY conservative in office, especially David Harmer who is running to replace McNerney, would support our Vets infinitely more than McNerney and any other democrat."
The facts on the particular bill under discussion in this thread, S.1963 "The Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010", don't support that statement. In a press release from the House Committee on Veteran's Affairs ranking member, Rep. Buyer (R-IN) was only able to call attention to three House bills from Republicans that were included in the final bill - and one of those bills, HR402, did nothing more than rename an existing facility. Notice that although one Republican (Rep. Boozman (AK)) was a co-sponsor of HR1546, *none* of the nineteen Republicans representing California signed on to Rep. McNerney's bill. Web LinkWeb Link::
From his first campaign in 2004, one of Congressman McNerney's top priorities for CD11 has been veteran’s affairs. Once elected he put that priority into action as he sought and was assigned to the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Subcommittee on Health.
On the other hand, I couldn’t find where Mr. Harmer has, in any of the campaigns he has run, pointed to veteran affairs as one of his key issues. Certainly not in his unsuccessful 1996 run for Utah’s 2nd District where he hoped to replace Rep. Enid Greene Waldholtz, for whom he had served as chief of staff and campaign manager. In his next campaign in CD10 against Rep. Garamendi, Mr. Harmer stated he had one issue: “the explosion in federal spending.” Note that in that same article Mr. Harmer thought it was an advantage that he wasn’t viewed as “conservative enough for some of the district's Republicans”. Web Link
I guess he’s changed his tune for the Tea Party in his current run for office, this time in CD11. Mr. Harmer’s current platform is built on “cut[ting] regulations” and only spending where there is revenue. That never bodes well for the men and women serving in our military, whether they are presently in the service or veterans. Web Link
Anita, you ask: “who wouldn't be in favor of our Vets?” Well, that would be Pres. Bush and the Republicans in Congress whose budgets slashed veteran’s benefits year after year even as they escalated the wars where our military men and women put their lives on the line day after day. Men and women, many of whom came home wounded, only to find out that the benefits they deserved had been cut from the Republican budget. Take the FY2007 budget for example: Web Link
Sorry, but I don’t see that Mr. Harmer who, as defined by his own words is "a career politician in search of a place to serve", and "considers himself a Christian first, an American second, a conservative third and finally, a Republican" is going to be any different than most of his Republican brethren . . . even if he does place them last in his list of attributes!
Posted by dublinmike, a resident of Dublin, on May 8, 2010 at 2:10 pm dublinmike is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
Anita stated "McNerney is a far left Democrat" In your eyes every Democrat is a far left in this case. Barbara Lee and Pete Stark are very much to the left of center and, as a life-long Democrat I would not vote for them.
And... 1) Congressman McNerney is a moderate. At least he was out in the public until people like you threaten his safety. 2)Pombo never came to our area unless to collect donations. 3) Harman doesn't even live in our district. He's just another carpetbagger and the fact that someone outside the 11th chose to run in our district speaks volumes for the types of candidates the Republicans can find within our district.
Posted by Anita, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on May 8, 2010 at 5:05 pm
"McNerney a moderate"??? Please do tell how voting 98% consistent with far leftist Madam Pelosi as McNerney has done, can be considered "moderate." It's not even "moderately communist"...it is totally there.
Posted by Ron, a resident of the Las Positas neighborhood, on May 9, 2010 at 11:26 am
Jerry McNerney is a fine rep for us all in District 11. Don't listen to these tea baggers calling him names and making false statements about him. You can tell by his hard work and his bill being made into law he understands us and in fact actually lives in the District. He is a good man and serves us all with pride. Thank you Jerry McNerney!!!!
Posted by Rae, a resident of the Mohr Park neighborhood, on May 10, 2010 at 11:41 am
First of all, let me just stop a moment to be thankful that I have so many more important things going on in my life, that sitting on a forum waiting to answer your next taunt doesn’t even rank. That said, let me take just a couple of minutes from my lunch period to once again share my opinion with you.
I have, in a couple of threads, provided a web reference for Rep McNerney’s sponsored and co-sponsored bills, amendments and resolutions in the 111th Congress. As you may or may not know, and I expect you do from your taunting, unless you are following a bill from its initial readings, through the committee process in the originating house of Congress, out of committee to the floor, and then if passed, through the same process in the other house of Congress where it’s name is changed and it may be die, be passed, amended and/or returned to the originating house. Frankly, it’s amazing that any bills are passed into law!
The Library of Congress Thomas database contains the official information that can be used to track bills, amendments and resolutions – up to a point. We are able to follow the trail and track the components of the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010 only by knowing what the Senate renamed the bill, what number it was assigned, and by then reading the actual bill for the information that was included in the House bills.
For example, we know that HR1335 and HR2898 sponsored by Rep Halvorson (R-IL) were included in the Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010, just as was Rep McNerney’s HR1456. Yet, if you check Thomas, the status on three bills is shown as being forwarded to Committee.
So, what I will say, and continue to say about Rep McNerney is that once elected in 2007 he put his campaign priorities into action as he sought and was assigned to the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs, Subcommittee on Health and the Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet, and the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.
If you check his history in both the 110th and 111th Congresses (see my last paragraph) you will find that in the bills and amendments he has sponsored (i.e. written) are bills on, for example, HR700 which amended the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to extend the pilot program for alternative water source projects (passed House), and HR2304 which directed the Secretary of Energy to conduct a program of research, development, demonstration, and commercial application for geothermal energy, and for other purposes (was incorporated in HR3221 which became law). If an important bill timed out in the 110th Congress, Rep McNerney didn’t give up - he reintroduced it in the 111th - like his veteran’s bill on catastrophic brain injury which he introduced as HR2201 in 110, reintroduced as HR1456 in 111 and was incorporated in the Senate bill S.1963 which is the topic of this thread.
He currently has another soldier’s bill in Committee, HR4440 which timed out as HR6686 in the 110th. This bill would “amend title 37, United States Code, to increase the maximum monthly rate for the military special pay known as hostile fire pay, imminent danger pay, or hazardous duty pay, to increase the maximum monthly rate for the family separation allowance paid to deployed members of the Armed Forces, and to increase other special and incentive pays to recognize the service of members of the Armed Forces and encourage recruitment and retention.” Considering we’re at war on two fronts, this seems like a bill that both Republicans and Democrats would get behind. Why is it then, that there is no, let me repeat that, *no* co-sponsorship from any Republican representative in this country? Where’s that support for our military who are putting their lives on the line under fire, many of whom are coming home with catastrophic injuries? Well, it’s certainly not on the Republican side of the House.
I need to run, but let me leave the following reference for you, or anyone, who would like to see what’s going on in Congress.
This is the website for the Library of Congress Thomas database, sorted by Congressional member in the 111th Congress. As you scroll down the list you can select and see, by Congressional member, what bills, resolutions and amendments each has sponsored and co-sponsored. You can do this for each session of Congress by selecting, at the top of the page, the Congressional session number. I’ve always found it to be an eye-opener. Once you’ve done your research, “jimf01”, please come back and tell me which Republican representative from our state has put as much effort into fulfilling their campaign priorities as Rep McNerney has. Web Link
Posted by Che, a resident of Livermore, on May 10, 2010 at 12:07 pm
McNerney is a hack and should go into retirement and let a younger person have the job. Actually, there should not be anyone in congress over the age of 55. They are destroying jobs so they need to move on so we can get the unemployment down to at least 12% in this state. Great job Jerry!!!.......not.
Posted by jimf01, a resident of another community, on May 10, 2010 at 2:25 pm
OK, well I guess that answers it. I am so very thankful to you for spending a couple of minutes to let us know that Rep McNerney has written ZERO legislation that has been passed into law up until this bill.
As for me, I will reiterate support for a candidate who will not work on pet issues and request hundreds of millions in earmarks.
David Harmer will work to repeal BAD legislation, starting with ObamaCare!
Posted by Rae, a resident of the Mohr Park neighborhood, on May 10, 2010 at 5:18 pm
WOW . . . so our military, veterans and clean energy are “pet issues”?
Not counting other Coalition forces, there have been 4,397 Americans killed in Iraq and 1,049 in Afghanistan. There have been 31,790 wounded in Iraq and 5,677 in Afghanistan. Because modern medicine is so much better than in the last war, more catastrophically wounded soldiers are coming home than we’ve ever seen, stretching not only the VA, but their family resources as well. And you consider those who have been put their life on the line every day, been wounded or killed in one of the wars to be a “pet issue”?
We are in the middle of one of the worst environmental disasters ever seen, with no end in sight. Unregulated big oil has been allowed to put their rigs in place in part because they said there were appropriate safety functions that would prevent the kind of disaster we’re now seeing. Well, big oil was so busy making billions in the revered Republican/Tea Party “free market”, that I guess they forgot they had no such safety precautions in place. And clean energy that would get us off of our oil dependence is a “pet issue”?
Well, I say thank goodness for Rep McNerney and his “pet issues”!!
I also see by your response that you were unable to come up with a Republican to hold up as a better example of a politician working for their District, other than Mr. Harmer, who, in his “search of a place to serve” can’t seem to decide exactly which Congressional District in the United States he wants to elect him.
It’s very clear why you, as a Tea Party Nation enthusiast, like Mr. Harmer so much – he’s become quite good at repeating Tea party rhetoric over and over and over. Well, except for his statement on where he ranks his being an American.
As you know, in Mr. Harmer’s Dec 09 interview with “The Mormon Times” he stated “he considers himself a Christian first, an American second, a conservative third and finally, a Republican. Web Link
You folks in the Tea Party movement have made it pretty clear that you have a very narrow view of who a “true American patriot” is. I’m surprised that someone who puts being an American second and a conservative third in their list of attributes is a Tea Party poster boy, but, as you said in your thread "TEA Party Power - how you can help keep it going!" discussing Mr. Harmer’s candidacy, you were OK with it. Web Link
I wonder, however, if you and Mr. Harmer’s other Tea Party supporters would be just as OK with his description of himself if he’d said he was “a Mormon first and an American second,” or “a Jew first and an American second”, or how about “Hindi first and an American second”, or maybe “a Muslim first and an American second”? If it’s OK with you that a candidate put his or her religion above being an American, none of those scenarios should bother you . . . so how come there’s so much effort in the Tea Party movement to “discredit” Pres. Obama as a Muslim? According to you, it’s OK, right??
Personally, I will never knowingly support a candidate who puts their religion ahead of being an American – no matter what that religion is. We have separation of church and state for a very good reason, and I don’t want a politician making laws for me based on his or her religious beliefs. There’s already too much of that going around on the far right. I also will not support a politician who has made it quite clear that his only position on the many issues facing us in CD11 is a very singular Tea Party position leaving me to believe that the only constituents he would support in CD11 are those “true American patriots” of the Tea Party . . . that is, of course, if they’re “Christian” first . . .
Oh yeah, it’s very clear that our military, veterans and clean energy certainly won’t be “pet issues” for Mr. Harmer.
Posted by jimf01, a resident of another community, on May 10, 2010 at 5:52 pm
Rae - You go right on repeating that:
David Harmer’s Dec 09 interview with “The Mormon Times” he stated “he considers himself a Christian first, an American second, a conservative third and finally, a Republican
Anyone who places Christian values first and party loyalty at the end of those four items is quite alright with me.
Rae - Christianity is not a religion.
As for your other statements characterizing falsely the thinking of TEA Partiers, it kind of makes you look bad after your statement above: re twisting facts, calling names and telling lies, because you are doing all three.
And when you are not doing that, you are simply troll baiting. I used to be able to have a somewhat respectful debate with you. Too bad.
Posted by jimf01, a resident of another community, on May 10, 2010 at 5:58 pm
It's quite a laugh to promote McNerney's focus on environmental and energy issues when it has culminated the last four years of Democratic control of Congress with this oil spill disaster.
I wouldn't have gone there, but since you did I will observe that McNerney's legislative efforts over the least four years did nothing to keep the MMS on the ball in their role, nor keep a single fire boom in the Gulf of Mexico where it could have been used in the early stage of this disaster.
But you would like another four years of Democrats asleep at the switch on their oversight duties on oil drilling, the banks, insurance companies, Fannie and Freddie and the mortgages, NUMMI
Let's keep tallying up the ways the Democrat control of Congress has cost this country.
Posted by radical, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on May 10, 2010 at 7:09 pm
well of course Christianity is a religion, but its much diferent thing to say you are a Christian 1st vs. to say you are a Mormon 1st-religious debates can be neverending-
but our founding fathers put their religious beleifs ahead of any adherence to a political party (or to the British Empire) or else we would have never had a country nor a Constitution!!!!! if you simply do not know it, our country cannot contniue to exist without people of good morals and of virtue in high office. athiests and agnostics have one main belief, which is nothing-if you dont believe in a higher power, a supreme being, you are much more likely to not have a set of core beliefs that lead you in life
Posted by Rae, a resident of the Mohr Park neighborhood, on May 11, 2010 at 2:14 pm
I certainly will continue to point out Mr. Harmer's interview in "The Mormon Times" because I think it's important to know what a candidate says when they're not posturing for their base, or putting out an official campaign statement on their "position". "The Mormon Times" article provides a unique look at Mr. Harmer's view of himself and his politics.
As for using "Christian values" to determine how a politician will act in office, well frankly, given the fraud and sex scandals of some of our most devout Christian politicians, “Christian values” don't really seem to mean a lot in politics - even to those politicians who make it part of their political platform.
Regarding your accusation of my “twisting facts, calling names and telling lies”, where exactly did I do that? Whether or not Pres. Obama was a Muslim, or was born in the USA, were questions that seemed to be important enough to be asked and answered by Pleasanton Tea Party enthusiasts at your tax day rally. In fact, the Pleasanton Patch write-up and a sample of interviews with Tea Partiers was pointed to from the Pleasanton Tea Party website (since removed). Web Link--