Rep. Jeff Perry in His Own Words

Speaking of misguided priorities...Mavericks bride writes...an Obama czar team recommended that women no longer need to perform breast self examinations. In addition the official recommendation for a base line mammogram is now 50 years of age instead of 40 years. Out of 1,900 mammograms performed, on average, only one women had cancer. So no worries ladies. Why would you put yourself through the anxiety of a mammogram and possible biopsy? Besides, the change will save one billion dollars in insurance costs. Isn't your health and well being worth it? And if you do not perform self exams to catch cancer early to survive the disease, think of all the money that could be saved with you no longer here needing health care in your later years. Do Obama's proposed health care initiative a favor, check out early.

"benefits to illegal immigrants"...how can this thought ever reach the top of the table?

When we have US citizens in poverty and jobless all over this country how can anyone utter "benefits to illegal immigrants".

I know quite a few Democrats who signed onto the Obama Presidency that will fight against any travesty called Comprehensive Immigration Reform? The one in 1986 was a complete disaster and unable to handle the sudden in surge of millions of more destitute people, thinking they were going to collect welfare? Our country is overrun with every conceivable crime, that includes murder, child and female violation, document fraud, transporting of illegal aliens, welfare fraud, house invasion, burglary, robbery, spousal abuse, gangs and other heinous activities The biggest scourge is drunken driving, which is killing and maiming citizens and residents on the highways and streets in rampant numbers. Go to THE DARK SIDE OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION site for statistics. The doors to America are wide open, but nobody in their right mind is going to accept the first surge of 2-3 million coming from the South when they hear Lady Napolitano proclaiming a new AMNESTY? Those who believe in America’s survival, without OVERPOPULATION as stated by the US Census bureau better read facts, not the lies at NUMBER

What is wrong with our elected officals? Cut funding for education, healthcare, veterans services, etc....AND at the same time give FREE education to ILLEGAL immigrants? What is the definition of illegal? Can I drive without a license, register a car without insurance, send my children to school without immunizations, etc.? No No No! Close the borders, send them home and start again with re-entry procedures. Maybe my children could go to College FREE! Use your brains. Make decisions with your head not your heart.

Rep. Perry, you are completely right as you almost always are. One thing people forget to mention about this topic is that as an illegal immigrant there is no documented source of income. When it comes time to fill out those financial aid forms, there are no tax returns. This generally will mean that the expected family contribution will be $0. This now allows the illegal immigrant to apply for grants and other aid that is intended solely for residents. Essentially, the illegal will be going to school for free. I would rather see a convicted cocaine trafficer get that money-they're both felons, but at least the dealer is a citizen (sarcasm, for all you libs with million dollar educations and no common sense).

I'll bet there IS a University of El Salvador...owned by an American business man, and paid for by American tax-payer dollars.
Of course, the profits all go to him.
Off-shore accounting...no-tax status if he can make it part of a church.

I believe in complete, 100% financial support for illegal immigrants who want to attend college... but they have to go to the University of El Salvador.

What is enabling these illegals to come here and sustain themselves???

How can an illegal person even apply for college??

Why don't we get to the root of the problem.....businesses that out-source for, recruit and hire these illegals. All to save a buck and put more $$ in their pocket.

That would make me "feel good".
And are you implying-not so subtly-that all Democrats are liberal?
Like how you hold your nose at a bad smell?
Cheap tactic neo-con.

When I read this in the paper today, I found it ironic that this plan is being proposed at the same time that the Governor is again cutting local aid for eduction. As has been reported; he just cut $700,000 for school district transportation for DY claiming that we need to make the hard decisions?

Me too! What a a nice idea.--going to have my little grandsons write something on them too.

You think members of a volunteer military would see a little more respect from those their fighting for. Richard, liblvr.... grow up.

Thanks for your service ladies and gentleman. I'll be sending some cards your way.

Hey Jeff, If you just bring them home from these fake wars, we won't have to waste anymore money on postage stamps, EH???????

The only drawback is how many non-elected positions will be created in the new spoils system. four terms and out? hey where is my new 100,000.00 state agency job? you make up one for me and ill make sure the next guy makes one for you

Term limits at both state and federal level are the only tool we have to end this cycle of bad pols making bad decisions, blaming it on someone else and getting re-elected. How right is it that a few people in MA can inflict Mr. Frank on everyone else. Do the rest of us share Pelosis values? so now we are all stuck wiht her. and of course Boston is so much better off with Tommy suining public unions to buy every election.

I am conflicted on this issue. I don't believe that anyone should be prevented from running for office, but on the other hand, the corruption and all that goes with it has gotten completely out of hand. So, put me down as being in favor of term limits, albeit reluctantly.

The only infallible, unstoppable, guaranteed way to get a truly new Congress is :
NEVER REELECT ANY INCUMBENT! AND DO IT EVERY ELECTION!

Don't let anyone serve more than one term. Some of the reasons to do this:

• It gives us a one-term-limited Congress without using amendments
• It encourages ordinary citizens to run for Congress
• It would be supported by 70% of the country who want term limits for Congress
• It is completely nonpartisan
• If repeated, it ends career politicians in Congress
• It opens the way to a “citizen Congress”
* It would open a torrent of fresh ideas to improve our government
• It ends the seniority system that keeps freshmen powerless
• It doesn’t cost money. But you MUST vote! Just don’t vote for an incumbent
• It is the only guaranteed, infallible, unstoppable way to “Throw the Bums Out”
• It takes effect immediately on Election Day
• If it doesn’t work, do it again and again! It will work eventually

NEVER REELECT ANYONE IN CONGRESS. AND DO IT EVERY ELECTION!

The only way to start to clean up Beacon Hill is through terrm limits and campaign finance reform.

earnie haigs, if I was rich, I'd be running too, except my caldron would be RED.

I support term limits because it encourages more people to run for office. Example, when Ted Kennedy held the senate seat, how often did anyone run against him? Not often. That's because many of the people who maybe would think about running would not run against Ted because of his political backing and the amount of money it would take just to try to challenge him. Now, with the seat open we have four democrats and at least one republican running. It's good for the citizens to get a chance to listen to varying ideas from different candidates. It opens up the process to new people. If we had term limits at the State level, I would think it would do the same thing - open the door for many to throw their hat in the ring, who maybe don't do so now because of the stranglehold some incumbents have. How many people challenge Rob O'Leary or Therese Murray, etc. That's why you get what we have now in Beacon Hill.

Question: Are the cards just for enlisted guys, or do the mercenaries and the contractors get cards too? Just wondering.

Cards are a nice gesture, what the soldiers really need is have a Commander in Chief who can decide whether to $hit or get off the pot and not leave them on the ground unsupported.

That and a big THANK YOU to the troops for their service to our country.

Thanks, Rep. Perry! I tried to e-mail Thomas George once about proposed legislation and no dice.The e-mail didn't even get through.
Please help out all the classic car enthusiasts and make pre-1980 cars exempt from the titling requirement.
I have specific language in mind, whereby owners would sign an affidavit affirming that they are the legal owners
of the vehicles and have not obtained ownership through illegal means.
There is a serious loophole preventing honest people from obtaining titles for classic cars, and The RMV could care less.

Horse escaped. Barn door remains open.

Will this country ever stop allowing the fox to guard the hen house...?

We actually have limited tort "reform" in Massachusetts for medical malpractice. We don't have an arbitrary cap on damages, but there are limits on contingency fees which, theoretically, will prevent those "greedy" trial lawyers from overreaching. Bad, bad trial lawyers!

There is also the tribunal, a panel of physicians that must review every medical malpractice case that is filed and if that panel of doctors judging doctors finds that the case has no merit the plaintiff must post a cash bond in order to proceed.

Still, our medical costs and malpractice insurance costs have not declined. Nor have such costs declined in Texas where they have an arbitrary cap on pain and suffering damages.

"Tort reform" is nothing more than another corporatist right-wing shibboleth designed to boondoggle the ignorant and uninformed who make up a significant part of the GOP's electoral base.

jakeskid and j.madden - you are both correct it is VERY difficult to find an attorney to represent you to sue for malpractice and even more difficult to win.

Doctors orders lots of tests because they are better at finding out what you DON'T have than finding out what you DO have if you have complicated medical issues.

Rather than say they don't know, they blame running lots of tests on preventing malpractice suits.

jake: The rumor I've heard is one must be highly educated, in a professional level job, young, and dead to win a medical malpractice suit these days. Clearly you do not fit the description.

I have just experienced trying to sue a doctor for what was to me obvious malpractice. In the process I discovered the the burden of proof is so elevated that the doctor basically becomes the key witness in his own prosecution. I short it is very very hard to win a malpractice case let alone get a law firm to take it on. This is the most misrepresented issue I have ever personally been involved with.

I have just experienced trying to sue a doctor for what was to me obvious malpractice. In the process I discovered the the burden of proof is so elevated that the doctor basically becomes the key witness in his own prosecution. I short it is very very hard to win a malpractice case let alone get a law firm to take it on. This is the most misrepresented issue I have ever personally been involved with.

Dennis Kucinich on the floor of the House:
"One out of every three dollars spent on healthcare goes to the profit-based portion of the system. Let's take that $800 billion that we're already paying for and put it into caring for people. Everybody would be covered. Single -Payer Now!!!"

1 out of 3 dollars goes to for profit....who's footing that bill? And who's benefitting?
Single Payer is the only real solution.

Tort reform is indeed a major factor in the cost of health care. In order to avoid legal action, doctors often order procedures and tests not essentially required for the patient.

With malpractice insurance premiums starting around sixty-thousand, averaging two-hundred and going as high as a half million dollars a year, together with the need for practicing self-protective medicine so the doctor can cover his ass, someone has to pay for it.


Guess who gets the final bill?

jane.logan / "exploding gas tank still on the road."

A combustible hazard? I'll need to avoid this when out and about.

"the biggest factors, tort liability and medical malpractice rates"

I don't believe that either.
It's profits profits profits.
That is the biggest factor.

Tort Reform will not make a significant change in the cost of medical care. The cost of Medical Malpractice is no more of a burden than the cost of General Liability insurance for other businessowners.

Ask a General Contractor how much he or she pays for insurance-the cost is a much higher % of their total income than what most doctors pay.

Without the Tort System we would have unsafe products like the Ford Pinto with the exploding gas tank still on the road.

Tort Reform makes taxpayers pick up the tab for doctor mistakes via social programs to pay for the sick and disabled. Without the ability to sue, people harmed by Doctors will end up in entitlement programs.

Tort Reform is not the answer to the rising cost of Health Care.

Finally, someone with correcting capacities?

I will strongly recommend to Richard to review the underlying issue here with the MA Dem senators. While Kerry was off running for president and thus missing the majority of senate votes, Kennedy didn't cry out to have help representing the state. Now that we have Kerry standing alone, he is crying out that he needs help. Why? Because he is lame and always has been and Kirk will be too. So instead of someone ELECTED by the people FOR the people, we will have two lame senators representing this state for the next 4 months. There truly is no emergency to have the senate seat replaced. Remember, in the past year, a time when Kennedys "lifes work" was being discussed, he missed over 90% of the votes in the senate. Where was the cry for representation then? Where was Kerry then? Why didn't Kennedy resign then? No pun intented,but, Kennedy dug his own grave on this issue. The next four months would be a great time to re-evaluate the health care issues and get it right as opposed to have it shoved down everyones throats. Then real representation can vote, not a lame puppet.

Creature from Jekyll Island 1 of 12 (you tube)
you have to watch this...even if you know it all.

Also neat that the republicans were strongly in favor of the rule when Romney wanted to utilize it, and now they are strongly against it when it comes to the dems.....
It's all politics, isn't it?
And speaking of politics and the Constitution...how is it that these people who claim to stand for freedom and hate big government are firmly behind the USA Patriot Act? The biggest breaker of freedoms and the Constitution to come along in a long time.
Where are the brave patriots to fight against that huge government intrusion, and complete dis-mantling of Constitutional rights?

Memory can be a curse sometimes. But didn't the democratic folks change the rules some time ago to make senatorial selection a delayed action - with an election in January to prevent a republican appointment by a republican gov? And now they wanted to change it back to protect their turf? Neat.

Old Sherlock Holmes adage: Stand by the water's edge and wave that handkerchief.