After the initial amusement of watching Congressman Garrett get schooled by Rep. Weiner for citing a memo that was proven to be a hoax, more information started to trickle out about just when the memo was determined to be fake – or at least the distinct possibility that it was not real. And with that, I started to wonder if Garrett knowingly cited a fraudulent memo on the House floor – or if he should have known and was irresponsible in his actions.

I’ll look at two things in this post: (1) Garrett’s past history of being deceitful with his constituents on healthcare and (2) the timeline of events on Friday leading up to his House floor speech.

For starters, Garrett’s own website cites a study by “The Lewin Group”, which is supposed to show just how evil health care reform is and how bad it is for the American public. Garrett also cites The Lewin Group in other pieces as “proof” of his views. What Garrett fails to mention is that The Lewin Group is WHOLLY-OWNED by United HealthGroup, so he is citing the insurance industry for his support without disclaiming that there is a tremendous conflict of interest, at best.

Garrett also disingenuously referred to the health care bill as “having bipartisan opposition”, yet the Medicare Part D bill in 2003 (which he voted for) was (1) grossly and willfully underestimated in terms of cost; (2) was a giveaway to big Pharma (noting that Garrett was one of a handful to vote for allowing insurance companies to continue collusion and price fixing a few weeks ago) and (3) had the vote kept open for HOURS while deals were cut to pass by a single vote – and had bipartisan opposition.

So, to say the least, there is a history of him being deceptive and taking the moral low road in order to push his personal or political agenda.

On the events from last week, both Brilliant at Breakfast and Talking Points Memo have good summaries on this, but the timeline goes something like this:

• 12:30PM – Republicans first “learned about” the memo. Interestingly, some Republican offices did nothing with this information since the origin could not be verified;
• 12:30PM Democratic Senate offices started receiving inquiries as to whether the claims were true (not whether the memo was real or fake though);
• 12:45PM – Politico story posted about the memo (also posted on right wing sites like Washington Times and Breitbart). Picked up by Drudge;
• 1PM – Rep. Boehner’s office sent the memo to reporters, without verifying whether it was fake;
• 2:40PM – After Democrats verify memo didn’t come from any offices, they pushed back on it;
• Mid afternoon – The Atlantic posts apology for posting the fake memo, Politico takes down the memo and The Hill tweets that it opted against posting the memo;
• 3:40 PM – Press conference with Eric Cantor and other Republican leaders indicating they knew the memo was fake but dismissed its importance (after pushing it hard all afternoon);
• 5:15PM – Scott Garrett makes remarks on House floor

Now, Garrett’s excuse was that it was distributed by a “reputable Capitol Hill newspaper” and he didn’t know it was retracted. But neither Politico nor Washington Times would have issued this in a print version, so he had to have received it online. And with his House colleagues/leadership all knowing a few hours earlier that this was at a minimum, not necessarily a real memo (not to mention the fact that there was no name and nobody could source the memo), it is incredibly irresponsible for him to cite something that could not be verified, was only received electronically, was taken down and refuted by numerous sources throughout Washington at various points throughout the day, and Garrett – someone with a history of bending or cherrypicking his facts to suit his agenda “didn’t know” about the retraction, the updates on every blog and publication, the press conference by his own caucus or even the hint that this memo was fraudulent?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Today, on the House floor, my wonderful Representative and embarrassment to the state, Scott Garrett, read from a “memo” that was already discredited as fake earlier in the day. Rep. Anthony Weiner completely shredded Garrett’s willingness to talk about fake memos as opposed to things like reducing the deficit or expanding health care or, as Weiner said so well – “we’re here to solve the problems of the American people, not quote from fake memos”.

Here it is, for your viewing pleasure

PolitickerNJ, take it away:

Theise seeks Dem nod to challenge Garrett

By Matt Friedman | March 12th, 2010 – 9:57am

Tod Theise

Tod Theise, a Republican-turned-Democrat who ran for Warren County freeholder last year, has decided to challenge U.S. Rep. Scott Garrett (R-Wantage).

“I view politics as a calling that demands public servants act as just that – servants of the people.  Far too many elected officials sell their souls to special interests in return for the money that fuels their political careers,” said Theise in a written statement.

Theise lives in Washington Township and works as a litigation analyst at Sullivan & Cromwell LLP.  He is a former West Orange Republican chairman and aide to former Essex County Executive James Treffinger.   He was the GOP candidate for State Assembly in 2003, losing to incumbents John McKeon (D-West Orange) and Mims Hackett (D-Orange).

Theise has already won the support of the Warren County Democratic Party and expects to receive the endorsement of the Sussex Democrats, but he did not compete for the support of the Bergen County Democratic Organization, where most of the district’s population – and even more of its Democratic vote – resides  (Bergen Democrats did not pick a candidate for Congress against Garrett at their convention last week).  He does plan to court Bergen County Democratic grassroops groups.

In an email message to PolitickerNJ.com, Theise acknowledged that taking on Garrett was a long shot.

“But he needs an intervention of sorts,” he wrote.  “Voting against the goals and accomplishments of the National School Lunch Program (one of 13 Congressmen to do so) is nothing short of a twisted cry for help.  Even Michelle Bachman and Eric Cantor voted to give props to the NSLP.”

The Record and the Express-Times have more on Theise’s announcement.

I’ll start by saying that anyone who uses the sentence that “MSNBC is the only counterpart to FOX and the right wing noise machine” has their head completely up their ass. Two hours per day (Olbermann and Maddow) do not make up for the countless hours of “fair and balanced programming” that Chris Matthews, Joe Scarborough or much of the daytime programming comprises – certainly, this is a mixed bag at best and nothing near the ridiculously and blatantly skewed programming on FOX – or even worse, the “supposedly neutral” but SO NOT neutral CNN.

But I digress….

A couple of weeks back, Chris Matthews had two Congressmen on Hardball to discuss health care reform and how the issue could be moved forward in a bipartisan manner. The Republican Congressman appearing was New Jersey’s own Scott Garrett. At the end of the segment, Chris heaped effusive praise on Garrett, calling him his type of Northeastern Republican, which I guess means the most radically rightwing kind. He even invoked the word “moderate” to describe Garrett (at which mention Garrett visibly cringed).

To grasp the abject stupidity of Matthews’ misplaced admiration, you have to understand who Scott Garrett is and what he stands for. As we have documented here time and time again, Garrett is arguably THE most radical right-wing member of Congress. His illustrious legislative record includes, among many other things:

• Voting against aid for victims of Katrina,
• Voting against extending unemployment benefits for American families,
• Voting against extending the Voting Rights Act,
• Voting against providing health care to poor children,
• Voting against anti-price gouging legislation holding big oil accountable,
• Voting against taxing bonuses for Wall Street execs (he actually argued that they “deserved” them),
• Voting for every bloated Bush budget, and
• Voting for every dime spent in Iraq.

Oh, and by the way Chris – He’s also catering to the birthers – if not necessarily an outward one himself, having said at a public meeting that he wanted to see Obama’s birth certificate. Garrett further distinguished himself following the earthquake in Haiti. His message on his Congressional web site said the he was praying for those constituents of his affected by the quake. No mention of the thousands of Haitians who were dead or injured. Garrett also opposed abortion even in the case of rape or incest – allowing a rapist to choose the mother of his child or a molesting father to force his daughter to bear his own grandchild. And he referred dismissively to the push to eliminate DADT as a “side issue” not worthy of his consideration. That’s Chris Matthews’ kind of Republican.

As Jason notes over at Blue Jersey, Garrett also recently appeared on MSNBC’s The Dylan Ratigan Show with guest host Ed Schultz. Once again he performed his one man show designed to portray himself as the sincere moderate that truly wants to work across party lines for the good of the American people. I can’t blame Ed because he was filling in at the last moment. But I can blame the show’s staff for not doing even a modicum of homework on their guest. Like Matthews, Schultz – someone who should know better – bought the well rehearsed charade hook, line and sinker.

By giving Garrett this kind of forum without challenging him on his record, MSNBC has aided and abetted an insidious political fraud. It is incumbent upon MSNBC to make sure this journalistic incontinence doesn’t happen again. First, try to actually do some research on your guests. You know, like Rachel Maddow does so well. Second, next time you extend an invitation for Congressman Garrett to appear on one of your infotainment shows, ask him why he voted time and time again to deprive Americans of their most basic civil rights. Then ask him how we can buy into his fairy tale of working toward a bipartisan utopia when he questions the very legitimacy of our President to serve in office based on debunked crackpot theories.

Maybe then MSNBC can begin to regain some semblance of journalistic integrity.

Hat tip to Hopeful at Blue Jersey

******************

If outrage described the right reaction to Scott Garrett’s vote this week against school lunches, what’s left for this “no” vote on a bill to stop child abuse by school officials:

In a move to provide the first comprehensive protections for children against abusive disciplinary actions by schools, the House on Wednesday easily approved a bill to restrict the use of forcible restraint and seclusion, in which children are held down, drugged or isolated in a locked room to control their behavior.

and, no, it’s not an imaginary problem:

The legislation stems in part from a government report last year that found evidence that hundreds of children — from preschool age to high school — had been traumatized or physically harmed by being held down or locked alone in rooms, some even tied to chairs. Many had developmental problems or were in special needs programs; many others were in regular classes. Some children have died, apparently because of overly aggressive discipline, according to numerous reports over the last decade.

Our other New Jersey Republicans rightly broke with their party to support the bill, but Garrett is a right-wing fanatic. Down With Tyranny and Digby have more on this shameful vote.

As pointed out by our friends at Down With Tyranny, a vote was held yesterday in the House with respect to the National School Lunch Program – a program that is even more necessary now given the state of the economy:

H.Res.362. It expresses the House’s support for the goals and ideals of the National School Lunch Program and “recognizes that our pupils deserve access to high-quality, safe, and nutritious meals in school.” It passed 403-13, every Democrat and 155 Republicans, including the entire GOP congressional leadership voting in favor.

And guess who was one of the 13?

Let’s look at some numbers. There are approximately 200,000 children living in Bergen, Sussex and Warren Counties. Of that, there are 12,400 children in Bergen who are on reduced or free lunch programs due to need, over 2,300 more in Sussex County and another 1,900 in Warren County. That is one out of every twelve children in these three counties who can’t afford a decent meal and rely on the National School Lunch Program.

And this is too offensive for Scott Garrett to support.

Garrett is very good at explaining away his unconscionable votes with a caveat such as “I agree in principle but…” or “I would have supported this, but….”. And frankly, actions speak louder than words. Time after time and vote after morally reprehensible vote, Garrett shows where his loyalties lie. This is about struggling families. And just as his vote against clean drinking water shows, Garrett can’t keep explaining away votes that show a pattern of disdain for the health and welfare of those in his district that he is supposed to represent.

What makes this worse is the fact that the BCDO is choosing to give Garrett a pass without even so much as a challenger to a man whose actions and record are nothing short of abominable.

Congressman Scott Garrett is quick to use fear and hyperbole when talking about his views of healthcare reform. And the interesting thing with all of his fearmongering is the complete absence of some of the most basic underlying concerns on why health insurance providers are able to collude, deny coverage and hike rates by however much they feel like.

So, with it being time for him to actually put the considerable money he gets from Big Insurance where his mouth is on the bill that Congressman Pallone discussed on repealing the antitrust exemption for insurance companies, what does he do?

Yup – he votes for collusion and price gouging and less competition (one of only 19 House members).

Here is some context:

Congressman Pallone recently posted about repealing the antitrust exemption that health insurance companies currently enjoy (linked above). And while this may not be the only reason why rates have been hiked and competition is all but eliminated, the simple fact remains is that there are industry wide price and competition abuses that are fostered by the exemption.

Now, there is more than just the anti-trust exemption at issue. There have been over 400 corporate mergers in the healthcare industry since the late 1990’s, and the Department of Justice/Federal Trade Commission were about as hands off as could be with respect to the mergers and the elimination of competition that resulted from it. Towards the back of this link is a summary of some major mergers and how they weren’t really challenged, just to provide more context. As a result of this, the five largest providers of group health insurance companies controlled 75 percent or more of the market in 34 states, and 90 percent or more in 23 of those states, a significant increase in concentration over a six year period.

So, back to Garrett – he is always in favor of more competition and more “market forces”. Even his own website section on healthcare talks about competition across state lines. But without a removal of the antitrust exemption, this is close to a nonstarter. And because of the lack of oversight on the hundreds of mergers that occurred, the competition that he talks about was bound to disappear rapidly. It is clear that when it comes to standing up for the very principles he purports to have, Garrett is nothing more than a walking hypocrite and contradiction.