By Charles Wilborn
from GoDanRiver.com
Less than a week after voting for health care reform in the U.S. House of Representatives, Rep. Tom Perriello, D-5th District, held a tele-town hall Thursday night to communicate directly with constituents about the legislation.
According to the moderator, more than 8,000 people called in throughout the hour-long conference and more than 90 percent of those who answered a survey found the call useful.
“We’ve reached an unprecedented number of calls,” Perriello said about constituent response to the legislation. “…This was a chance to give people one more opportunity to ask questions about what was in the House bill and what might be in the Senate bill.”
About 15 people had the chance to ask a question, which encompassed concerns about Medicare, the public option, tort reform and personal responsibility. No one asked about abortion funding, which was explicitly excluded from the House bill through the Stupak amendment.
Some called to express their gratitude for Perriello’s vote, others called to question his commitment to 5th District residents who vehemently oppose the legislation. Perriello answered all calmly and respectfully, laying out his reasons for supporting the bill and addressing those areas he felt still needed work, such as tort reform and interstate competition.
“The good news is we’ve gotten some of the first pilot projects at the federal level looking at (tort reform),” Perriello said. “…The bad news is we weren’t able to get as far as I wanted to get.”
Perriello said the bill would reduce costs for middle class families and small businesses, would address rural disparities and would reduce the federal deficit in the first and second decades. He stressed that Medicare Advantage would be protected, the “donut hole” would be reduced to decrease prescription drug costs for seniors and people would not be refused coverage based on preexisting conditions.
One aspect of the bill that Perriello supported would be a move toward wellness-based and preventative care by rewarding hospitals for more holistic treatment rather than symptom-based treatment. He was also insistent that a public option would help to increase competition, but is not the “end all be all,” for reform.
The goal, he explained, is to provide more options so that individuals and small businesses can better negotiate lower premiums and compete with big businesses.
Two groups have recently launched TV ads in reaction to Perriello’s vote — the 60 Plus Association criticized his support of the bill and Americans United for Changed thanked him. This week, local Tea Party groups, with help from Americans for Prosperity, have held vocal protests outside his district offices.
One woman on the call asked how Perriello was able to handle “all the enmity… and all the vicious lies” toward him from his opposition.
“There are really good and decent people on all sides of this debate,” he said. “Almost everyone in this debate wants what’s best for America…What we’re hoping for is to restore civility and substance to our debate and not go to the extremes.
“…People are engaging in this debate for the right reasons. It’s an intimate issue.”
