In a Congress of millionaires, Republican Anh Cao voted for poor New Orleans
Filed under: People, Healthcare
The single House Republican who voted for the Democrats' health-care legislation is a first-term congressman from a strongly Democratic -- and very poor -- district comprising most of New Orleans. Rep. Anh "Joseph" Cao's vote is significant, not because it was politically motivated -- and it was -- but because it highlights the disparity between lower- and middle-class people throughout the country and many of their representatives in Washington, D.C.Among the 535 elected representatives deciding the future shape of the American health care system, some 44% are millionaires, according to a new study by the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), a nonpartisan reseach group that tracks the effect of money in U.S. politics and policy. Rep. Cao is not among them. Neither are his constituents.
"I listened to the countless stories of Orleans and Jefferson Parish citizens whose health-care costs are exploding -- if they are able to obtain health care at all," Cao, the first Vietnamese-American to be elected to Congress, said in a statement after the legislation passed the House with a 220-215 vote.
"Louisianans need real options for primary care, for mental health care, and for expanded health care for seniors and children," he added. Cao fled Saigon with two siblings three days before the city fell when he was 8 years old and came to America. Last year he defeated William J. Jefferson -- the Democratic lawmaker busted with $90,000 in his fridge -- who ran while under indictment on federal corruption charges and has since been convicted.
A City on the Margins
Cao's father, an officer with the South Vietnamese Army, was imprisoned by Communists. Cao almost became a priest, spending six years in the Society of Jesus, the Jesuit order. In a C-Span interview, Cao said during that time he was asking "a lot of questions about human existence, human life, what is the meaning of life," adding that Kierkegaard, the Danish philosopher, "was involved in my life."
The average annual income in Cao's district is about $25,000 -- well below the national average. Thoughout the parishes near the French Quarter, entire blocks of dilapidated NoLa-style houses are for sale. The city's grand boulevards are the scenes of idle. Tourist traffic is the only real sign of bustle.
In short, while New Orleans has made strides since being devastated by Hurricane Katrina, it remains very much a city on the margins of American political power. (Having inveterately corrupt officials doesn't help, either.) Cao, who went to Baylor University and later earned masters and law degrees from Fordham in New York and Loyola University in New Orleans, where he and taught philosophy and ethics, decided to embark on "a personal crusade for social justice," according to his website.
"Much Better Positioned" for Hard Times
Cao's vote for expanded health coverage for the citizens of New Orleans comes as a new study, released in the middle of the worst recession in generations, shows some 237 millionaires are serving in Congress -- nearly half of the lawmakers. That contrasts with about 1 percent of all Americans are considered millionaires. What's more, 50 members of Congress have estimated wealth of at least $10 million.
"Generally speaking, members of Congress are wealthy by comparison with the vast majority of Americans. That doesn't mean they're immune to the effects of this ailing economy -- they're not," said Sheila Krumholz, the CRP's executive director. "But they are much better positioned to withstand financial pressures than the people they represent."
Rep. Cao doesn't own a sports team or a real estate empire -- unlike some of his colleagues. He made a bold bid for some publicity -- if not lasting power -- when he decided within the last 15 minutes of the proceeding, to vote yes for the health-care bill.
"My vote tonight was based on my priority of doing what is best for my constituents," Cao said, adding that he had "obtained a commitment from President Obama that he and I will work together to address the critical health-care issues of Louisiana."
It's a win-win for Obama, of course. He gets his health-care bill through the House (the Senate will be a lot tougher), and he can be seen as aiding New Orleans. What Cao's vote does for his political career remains to be seen.
Dell in a handbasket: Should founder Michael Dell resign?
TARP saved the banking system, but failed at everything else
Why we shouldn't audit the Federal Reserve
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
11-08-2009 @ 8:35PM
elef said...
The guy wanted to be a Catholic priest.
Why do you see political calculation everywhere? Probably he is very ethical and he also is a self-made millionaire. No trust-fund-baby here. No inherited wealth.
How could he look himself in the mirror knowing that every year 45,000 Americans (many in his poor district) lose their life because they are not insured?
It sad that some Republicans chose to support the insurance lobbyists rather than the American people.
Reply
11-16-2009 @ 9:55AM
Troy said...
The Republicans are not siding with the lobbyists, they are siding with low cost health care for everyone. The Republican party wants health care for everyone, but not through the Feds, through low cost private companies which built this country in the first place. Get real my friend, the government did not build this country, private enterprise did. Dont tread on me and stay out of my back pocket.
11-08-2009 @ 8:57PM
sherell said...
I applaud Cao for doing the right thing even though it may make him unpopular with his Republican constituents.
Reply
11-08-2009 @ 9:21PM
Francis D. Coleman said...
Dapper Dan writes:
About Cao's vote I have this to say: One should not second guess his motive. At the same time I am sad about every yes vote because the bill is too expensive. It neither does the job nor is it fiscally efficient. A no vote opens the possibility to go back to the drawing board and draft a really good bill. This one was drafted too much in a hurry or rather, action was pushed too hard from the Executive side, forcing continued debate while other very important matters were languishing. That is never good for a bill. Yes, we need a health bill, a good bill, embracing more people but being less expensive It's burocratic complications that make the present bill more expensive than anyone can presently imagine! Streemline the bill. Reduce its burocratic implications, make it embrace more people!
Reply
11-08-2009 @ 10:30PM
elef said...
Dear Francis this is an excellent bill because it will save trillions to the economy over the coming years. Do not take my word for this do the math.
When George Bush said everyone has health insurance in America because everyone goes to the emergency room he was right. Millions in America wait until they are very sick and they end up in the emergency where they get care for free unless they have assets - but they still get care after they lose their house. The poor get VERY very expensive care for "free". Of course it is much less expensive to prevent. Furthermore someone pays for this "free" and bad service that ends up costing 45,000 unnecessary dead Americans a year.
You and I pay for it. No more paying for bad service will result in savings. We cannot afford not to pass this bill now.
When everyone pays their own insurance it will be much cheaper for all, even if the government helps the poor because it is cheaper to avoid going to the emergency room.
Furthermore with the government option the insurance monopolies will have to compete. If government run insurance is so bad why Americans love Medicare? And if government run insurance is so inefficient what do private insurers have to be afraid? And why Medicare costs have gone up slower than private insurance in the US?
The good companies have nothing to be afraid but the bad insurers will go out of business. This is the reason that health costs will go down in America as health care will vastly improve.
I know people who got cancer and as result they cannot change jobs even if they can get more money in the new job because they will lose their insurance!! Now that is both sad AND wrong.
11-09-2009 @ 2:27AM
ij70 said...
elef, I loled. They said medicare would save money, now it is one of the biggest scams in the country. Did you see the 60 Minutes report a couple of weeks ago?
11-08-2009 @ 11:26PM
John said...
Cao is a pandering, gutless slimebag. He waits til the last moment to cast his electronic vote...after he sees the 218 go down. A real "man" of his convictions. What a phony creep! If it stays at 217, he votes "nay". What garbage!
Reply
11-09-2009 @ 12:56PM
gerard said...
come on now John. Pandering to whom? His constituents?
Cao is a politician. He has to worry about vote counts and the likelihood of the bill being passed. He has to worry about angering his own party as well as being re-elected. Say what you will, but he is the only person to vote against the position of his own party. Think about that. Think how hard it is to deviate away from the pack. Think about the slew of angry calls he's getting right now from his party leadership.
You're being unfair to the guy.
11-18-2009 @ 6:39AM
Joe Wise said...
thank you, rep. cao for your courage.
Reply
11-09-2009 @ 4:17AM
J. Skinner said...
No matter the party, the job of your elected official is to represent the people in your district. That's what he did and I sure wish some of the others in his party would do the same.
Plus, how about the number in Congress worth 10 million or more? Granted there will be a few, but do you really expect most those folks to even know or care about your problems?
Reply
11-09-2009 @ 7:06AM
Willy said...
It's sad when a politician feels compelled to explain, "My vote tonight was based on my priority of doing what is best for my constituents."
This should be their primary motivator 100% of the time, and it should be so obvious as to never warrant an explanation.
Reply
11-09-2009 @ 7:59AM
Tony said...
Why isn't Cao getting the poor the jobs to rebuild their beloved city? Instead of living off the dole, they should be working using the jobs that Obummer promised, then they could afford healthcare with less government involvement. Why don't they go to the free clinics that the tax payers support instead of the hospital for preventative care. The children of the poor should be covered under CHIP programs that most states have. This is all BS. Living off the dole is a way of life and this will never change if the able-bodied poor don't receive or use incentives to make a living while saving taxpayers money..
Reply
11-09-2009 @ 9:17AM
syl said...
Finally a politician votes the right way rather then his party way. If we had more people doing the righ thing we might get something done in this country. Come on peole. You are never worried about mortgaging your kids future when we talk about SS or medicare. Stop being robots of the press and think for yourselves
Reply
11-09-2009 @ 9:31AM
Barry said...
Not all the members of congress are millionaires but they all get a million in perks and expenses..............
Reply
11-16-2009 @ 8:26PM
lightacandle said...
And they all have healthcare, which is a fact that so many forget.
11-09-2009 @ 9:46AM
scott said...
Anyone that says the Repubs are against Healthcare because of the "insurance lobby" is either stupid or disingenuous. Public HC has never worked, anywhere it's been tried. We're against Government managed medicine, not because we don't care about the approx 10 million people who can't get coverage(that is the real number when you take out illegals, 20 somethings who choose not to get insurance, and the poor who already qualify for Medicaid/S-CHIP, etc but aren't enrolled) but because it will make HC worse for all Americans(shortages, waiting lists, rationing, lack of innovation) and bankrupt the country as it is going to Canada and Western Europe.
Wise up people and quit playing bumper sticker politics!!
Reply
11-09-2009 @ 10:55AM
Clay S. Conrad said...
Scott has no clue what he is talking about. First, this bill isn't "public healthcare," it's only a public option for payment of healthcare costs. Nowhere does it speak of nationalizing hospitals, clinics, making doctors government employees, etc. That's just not in it.
Secondly, Public healthcare works very well in Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, France, Canada, and numerous other countries. The system we have right now is far behind the healthcare in any of those countries.
Maybe Scott needs to travel more. His myopic opinion is based on myths, not facts.
11-12-2009 @ 7:56PM
cleanfreaks2 said...
It's been done in other countries for more than 30 years with no problem. Republicians & democrates both take money from the insurance industry - THAT'S why we can't get a bill passed. The average salary for a congressman is $174,000. Yet half of them are millionaires. No healthcare, millionaires blocking healthcare....doesn't take a mental giant to figure it out.
11-09-2009 @ 11:01AM
David said...
Personally I think the healthcare bill passed by the House is a disaster. Plus, the U. S. govenment is not capable of running it. People should be self sufficient and look after their own welfare and not depend on the govenment, except in extreme situations. For those that simply cannot work then they should receive some type of voucher from the government so they can purchase health insurance. The district this man is from is very poor and I will give him some credit, he, most likely, voted the desires of his constirutents and definitely not the party. That is better than many who simply voted the party line and not what their contituents wanted. Those are the one that should be chastised and retired at their very next election.
Reply
11-09-2009 @ 1:50PM
sgentilejr said...
I suggest you people actually read the Health Care Bill that was passed. It clearly states in no uncertain terms "Everyone will be REQUIRED to pay for their health care coverage".
Hello, anyone home? REQUIRED_____That means that if you are working for $8.00 per hour and cannot even afford to pay your rent or put food on your table___you will be REQUIRED to pay for your health care plan costs. And unfortunately the Bill passed by Congress does not even state HOW MUCH you will be REQUIRED to pay___instead it merely states everyone will be "Required" to pay for health care coverage..
Reply