By Laura Woodhead – Talk Radio News Service

Health care reform without a public option is not worth the vote House progressive leaders said Thursday. Congressional Progressive Caucus Co-Chair Rep. Raul Grijalva, (D-Ariz.) warned that a plan without a strong public option does not constitute real reform.

“The line has been drawn,” said Grijalva, during a conference call to discuss why a growing number of House members refuse to support a bill without a public option. “For us to pile on a trillion plus dollars into the same bankrupt system that we have of health care delivery in this country, the same insurance industry, is not worth the vote if it doesn’t have a public option.”

The comments come following a letter sent to Health and Human Service Secretary Kathleen Sebelius on Monday, signed by 60 progressive members of congress, stating that there would be no support for a health care bill, either on the House floor or after conference, that contained no public option.

Congressional Progressive Caucus vice Co-Chair Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), warned that attempts at a bi-partisan compromise on the public option would not produce positive votes from Republicans, as it is reform that they oppose, not a public plan.

“Anybody who thinks that the way to get a bill is to abandon the public option better be able to explain, better be able to tell me how many people they think they are going to get from the right side of the aisle,” Ellison said. “We won’t get any. The fact is that we should not count on any Republican votes.”

Joining the Congressmen in the discussion was Jacob Hacker, Stanley Resor Professor of Political Science, Yale University who said that the Senate Finance Committee’s compromise in the form of “untested” consumer co-operative simply did not represent real reform.

“Consumer co-operatives should not be seen as a substitute for a public plan,” said Hacker. “[Co-ops are a] political solution to a political problem unlike the public plan which is a policy solution to a real world problem.”

“They should be understood for what they are, an effort to kill the public plan and with it an effective competitor to consolidated insurance companies.”

By Learned Foote- Talk Radio News Service

House Democrats on Tuesday introduced H.R. 3149, otherwise known as the “Equal Employment For All Act,” which aims to reduce the burden of unemployment on individuals with poor credit scores.

The bill would prohibit employers from using credit reports to guide hiring decisions and from asking applicants to voluntarily provide this information.

Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), who wrote the legislation, said that 43% of employers use credit checks during the hiring process.

Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-Ill.), a co-sponsor of the bill, called such credit checks “unnecessary barriers to employment.” Rep. Cohen cited a study by the American Psychological Society, and said that unless the job “involves significant financial responsibility,” these credit reports have “no relevance to a person’s qualifications or ability to do jobs.”

Some employers would be exempt from the legislation, including financial institutions and some governmental agencies.

The congressmen argued that bad credit reports often result from factors that cannot be controlled by the individuals in question, including medical issues and job loss during troubled economic times. Rep. Cohen cited studies emphasizing that racial minorities often have worse credit report ratings than whites. “We shouldn’t allow for credit reports that don’t help employers, but only aggravate circumstances in parts of the communities most hurt,” he said.

Rep. Gutiérrez said that “too many Americans are caught in the preventible cycle of debt.” He said that “they’ve fallen into bad credit and as a result they cannot do the one thing that would enable them to climb out: get a job, work hard, and earn a better score.”

The bill has 31 cosponsors, most of whom are members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.