It's 15 months to the election, I think Clark and Reed both deserve some time to expand their policy positions. Tinklenberg on the other hand has had 5 years...

I'm also supporting Maureen, but I don't think insulting people is the way to help her cause. Reed has the bona fides to bring unequaled experience to the health care debate on the hill, but you really shouldn't detract from others' accomplishments either.

Maureen is moderate in the sense that she doesn't feel obligated to toe the party line, I think. I don't think she feels ideologically obligated to back every single "democratic" proposal simply out of party loyalty, I think she's the type of person who educates herself about a subject then makes an informed decision, which is really what one would want to see in their representation. A thoughtful representative, NOT someone who comes to every issue with unmalleable ideas written in stone.

Also, regarding health care, she has extensive knowledge and experience working in MN health care, which is by and far, the best in the country re: cost, coverage and outcomes. She was the head of the group that spawned community measurements, I seriously doubt she'll be "just another blue dog democrat on health care".

El has a voting record?

Yeah, sailor I'm afraid is mistaken in that. As far as I see it, it's primarily over-treatment by doctors, those who are actually trained over decades to know what's best in a given situation. Whether to order a scan or not, a blood test or not, prescribe a medication or not, generic or otherwise, do a followup visit or not, send home or admit a patient, surgery or no surgery, stent or no stent.

The over treatment is due to 2 factors:
1.) there is no guideline for best practices, it's often not known what the best course of action to take is in a given situation and often the cheapest and most effective methods are not used
2.) in a system that rewards treatments and not results the more procedures a doctor or hospital does the more they get paid, so there's that incentive to over-treat also, it's no insidious in most cases, but it is present and in the back of doctors' minds.

Anyway, we'll have to wait and see where Maureen comes out with her stance on health care, but I'm certain it will be the most pragmatic and well-informed stance keeping the patient and American public's best interests at heart. Rather than speculate about what Dr. Reed will propose let's give her a little time to formulate her thoughts and policy ideas into a written brief or whatever to put on her site.

I fully support Dr. Maureen Reed. Every endeavor she begins she goes at with a gusto. I don't think there's anything gaudy about fund-raising prowess. $230,000 is a staggering and impressive sum for a first time congressional candidate in the first quarter of her candidacy.

Maureen has often stated that her foci in the 6th district will be on job creation, dealing with foreclosures in the district and helping reform health care.

For me, I don't think I could find a better candidate.

Also, it's a little odd that the post isn't tagged under Maureen Reed though it's tagged under El and Clark.

Don't forget that she was also on the U of M board of regents. So she certainly has a background in education policy as well as health care.