“Louisiana Democrats are desperate to change the conversation on health care reform – and for good reason,” said Republican Party of Louisiana Communications Director Aaron Baer.  “Faced with defending Charlie Melancon’s poor voting record and failure to listen to the concerns of Louisiana voters over the August State Work Period, they’ve resorted to distortion in an attempt to distract voters from the truth.”

Rather than knowingly pushing a misreported claim about Senator Vitter endorsing any “plan,” they ought to answer the following questions about Charlie Melancon’s poor record on health care reform:

• Why did Melancon fail to hold a single town hall meeting during the August State Work Period?
• Why did Melancon vote against removing the public option from the House bill when he had the opportunity?
• Why did Melancon vote to kill an amendment that would have required members of Congress to enroll in the government plan?
• Why did Melancon vote to allow bureaucrats to dictate decisions best made by patients and their doctors?
• Why did Melancon vote to allow comparative effectiveness research to be used to ration health care?

“Despite Charlie Melancon’s rhetoric, his record demonstrates that he’s done everything in his power to protect the most liberal elements of the bill favored by his Democrat Party masters – Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi,” said Baer.

Background:

Burgess Amendment #28 To Remove The Public Option, Melancon Voted No. “Federal departments, agencies, or other federal entities may not use federal funds to establish a federally-funded qualified health benefits plan.” (text,vote)

Blunt Amendment To Require Members Of Congress Enroll In The Public Option, Melancon Voted Yes To Kill The Amendment. “[T]he President, Vice President, or Member shall only be eligible to enroll in the public health insurance option through the Health Insurance Exchange.” (text, vote)

Gingrey Amendment C To Prevent Bureaucrats From Dictating Health Care Decisions, Melancon Voted No. “Nothing in this section shall be construed to allow any federal employee or political appointee to dictate how a medical provider practices medicine.” (text, vote)

Rogers Amendment 1 To Prevent Rationing, Melancon Voted No. “In no case may any comparative effectiveness research conducted, supported, or developed by the Task Force on Clinical Preventive Services or the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality be taken into account in any coverage determination, used to evaluate any coverage requirements, or used to determine or evaluate reimbursement levels for any public or private insurer or provider.” (text, vote)

The New Orleans Times-Picayune Printed A Clarification Of Senator Vitter’s View Of The Pelican Institute Study. “Vitter clarifies health-care views: U.S. Sen. David Vitter says he does not support scrapping the nation’s employer based health insurance system in favor of individually owned policies or converting the current Medicaid program into vouchers for private insurance.  A story published Tuesday reported Vitter’s praise for a Pelican Institute policy analysis that calls for such changes.  While Vitter spoke favorably about the study, he did not specifically endorse particular elements of the report.” (“Corrections and Clarifications, New Orleans Times-Picayune, 9/17/09)