Segall on the issues—Part Three: The sit-down
(Editor’s note: This is Part 3 of a three-part series about my conversations with Democratic congressional candidate Josh Segall last week when he was in Opelika. To read Part 1, click here; to read Part 2, click here.)
After the meeting, Segall accepted a $5,000 campaign contribution from Greg England and representatives of the United Steelworkers Union. I spoke with England and Bobby Donald, president of the Lee County Democratic Club and also a union representative, about their support for Segall. The two have worked together in Washington and have spent time lobbying U.S. Rep. Mike Rogers. I asked them about Rogers’ support for the minimum wage increase.
“Mike votes against us on everything that comes up,” England said. The only exceptions, he said, are when Rogers sees bills that are going to pass anyway; in those cases, England said, Rogers will vote with the union’s interest.
That’s what happened with the minimum wage, England said.
I had one more opportunity to sit down with Segall and ask some follow-up questions. What about Pakistan? I said. Do you consider it an ally?
“Pakistan is as serious an issue as you have anywhere in the world,” Segall said, noting that Pakistan is a nuclear power.
What about cross-border raids in pursuit of militants from Afghanistan, and what about the Pakistani military’s orders to shoot American soldiers who cross the border in the course of such raids?
The attention the Bush Administration has paid to Iraq has been “damaging” to our interests in Pakistan, Segall said, because “it has allowed al-Qaeda to rebuild” there. But “if we need to go over the border, we go over the border” in pursuit of the militants, Segall said.
Segall went on to discuss how the United States’ relationship with Pakistan has deteriorated over the years. He noted that, decades before, we had a good relationship with that country based on our financial support for their infrastructure and education needs. “We need to do that again, to make sure that they don’t become a breeding ground for terrorism,” Segall said. “We need to have engagement with them on all levels.”
Back to health care, I wanted to hear more about Segall’s support for legislation barring hospitals from charging insured and uninsured patients different rates for the same procedure. He said that he would require hospitals to charge uninsured patients the same amount for the same procedure that they charge insured patients. Failing to do so is discrimination against the uninsured, Segall said, since insurance companies negotiate with hospitals for preferred rates for procedures performed on insured patients.
But wouldn’t that serve as a disincentive for hospitals to negotiate the lower price? I asked. Wouldn’t that serve as a disincentive for people to get health insurance?
Hospitals are going to have to negotiate, Segall said; “that’s capitalism. The market tends to be a good thing, but we don’t have capitalism in health care right now,” he said. “There are many places where you don’t have a choice of provider, and there isn’t enough information” to make an informed choice where choices do exist.
Finally, I asked Segall about his stance on abortion. We discussed the Rogers ad that calls him “pro-abortion.” Segall said that he would support Democrats for Life’s 95-10 Initiative (legislative info here and here), which seeks to decrease the incidence of abortion by 95 percent over 10 years, and “real sex education,” which he defined as abstinence-plus.
Segall provided me with the following statement on the Air Force’s tanker bid, which Alabama won and then lost in a dramatic Pentagon reveral that pitted the American West and Midwest against the American South:
I think both parties have been pandering to Washington state, where Boeing is located, and they ought to be ashamed of themselves. Northrup Grumman clearly delivered the better bid; they would build larger, more versatile aircraft for less money. I hope the final decision is based on economics, not on politics.
And on concerns about his ability to act independently of his party, Segall provided this statement:
A Congressman’s first responsibility is to the people of his district, and this means you’ve got to be willing to break with your party and to do things that are going to make your donors unhappy. This takes leadership and independence, and Mike Rogers hasn’t demonstrated either of those things. When I’m in Congress, I’ll work with whoever is in the White House and anyone in Congress to bring good jobs to the third district.
So, there you have it: My three-part blog post about my conversation with congressional candidate Josh Segall last week.
Questions? Comments? Concerns? Ideas? Please e-mail me; I’d love to hear from you.
The Segall campaign plans to work the phones every Wednesday and Thursday night and canvass neighborhoods within the district every Sunday through Election Day.
Thanks!
See also:
