Progress Illinois

Today in Washington, the U.S. House of Representatives will begin debating legislation that would repeal the new federal health care law. The body could pass that bill as early as tomorrow. And while U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez rightfully called the effort "political theater at its worst" in a statement Friday, namely because any legislation that clears the lower chamber will be blocked in the U.S. Senate or the White House, advocates of health care reform are taking the Republicans' offensive quite seriously.

On Friday, we showcased a new report that analyzes the practical impact retracting the Affordable Care Act would have on Illinois consumers. (Ezra Klein did the same thing using national figures this morning.) And reverting to that status quo, warns U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky, is immoral and economically unsound. At a press event sponsored by the Campaign for Better Health Care, the North Side Democrat was joined in Chicago this morning by one of her constituents, diabetic David Zoltan-Breiger, who recently enrolled in Illinois' new federally funded high-risk insurance pool. "I don't need to worry about what happens if I have an emergency," Zoltan-Brieger says. "I'm covered ... for now." Watch portions of their comments below:

After taking a full-out repeal vote, Republicans will quickly move to gut central provisions in the new law. Already, the GOP leadership is preparing to pass legislation that would "direct committees to craft new legislation." That could mean initiatives to rescind the individual mandate, which is unpopular but the lynchpin of the reform package. (Without it, premiums will skyrocket for those who are not healthy enough to forgo insurance.) "Let's not be defensive about this issue of a mandate," Schakowsky says. "It is a necessity to make the system work. We want everyone in the United States of America to have insurance."

As some anticipated, U.S. House Democrats are balking at a proposed tax cut deal negotiated by the White House and Republicans on the Hill. This morning, some members of the Democratic caucus blocked a vote on the package, which would extend temporarily emergency unemployment insurance and the Bush-era tax cuts for all earners, among other provisions.

House Dems are frustrated with how well the nation's rich make out under the current accord. They are particularly angry with changes to the estate tax law, which they consider far too generous for the wealthiest households in America (and they are right).

U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky is one progressive who is working hard to make the deal better for average people. On PBS' Charlie Rose last night, she reminded viewers that income inequality is a "threat to our democracy" and that this deal exacerbates that problem. Watch it: (Here's the full appearance):

Still, there's a lot of urgency to get some type of deal passed. The tax cuts will expire on December 31 for everyone along the income scale unless Congress approves an extension. Unemployment insurance, as we know, already lapsed. By February, some 241,000 workers in Illinois are scheduled to exhaust their benefits if no additional relief is provided. And the bill, as ugly as it is, would provide some fiscal stimulus to an economy that's not chugging along at full strength.

Tim Fernholz outlined four ways the party could improve the package here.

After blowing a deadline to vote on a final plan by December 1, President Obama's so-called deficit commission plans to weigh in on its controversial proposal tomorrow. In order to send the group's recommendation to the U.S. Senate formally, 14 of the 18 members must sign on.

U.S. Rep. Jan Schakowsky (IL-9) was the first member to come out and announce that she will vote no after she claimed this summer that conservatives had taken over the commission. Progressives have complained that the plan penned by the commission's co-chairs makes the tax code more regressive and relies too heavily on spending cuts. Schakowsky unveiled an alternative debt reduction plan she says "achieves our goal" by 2015 while protecting "the poor and the middle-class." Progress Illinois highlighted her plan here.

The other panel's representative from Illinois -- Sen. Dick Durbin -- has not yet said how he will vote on the recommendations, though he does want to ensure they did not "disproportionately impact" the elderly, the poor, and children. Durbin does support an increase in the age for Social Security eligibility, a key part of the proposal (and one that is also highly regressive). Because of this, concerned groups are organizing to urge Durbin to vote against the plan. The Illinois Alliance of Retired Americans and the Strengthen Social Security Campaign wrote to the state's senior senator to fight the proposal. Other progressives worried about a possible yes vote from Durbin should consider doing the same.