Kathleen Vinehout, 53, came to politics relatively late in her career after spending 10 years running the family dairy farm and the 10 years before that teaching health administration to college students.

In her first run for public office, Kathleen was elected in 2006 to the state senate from a large, mostly rural district in the western part of the state. She was re-elected in 2010 and is serving her second four-year term.

In the senate, she has worked to make health care affordable, create health insurance exchanges for individuals, farmers and small businesses, bring more equity to school funding, keep consumer protection provisions in our telecommunication laws, and improve the efficiency of state government operations.

Prior to being elected to the Senate, Kathleen was the primary operator of the family’s dairy farm near Alma. She received many quality milk awards and was elected president of the Dairy Herd Improvement Association in Buffalo County. The farm is now certified organic and produces hay and grain.

Before she and her husband started their dairy farm, Kathleen directed both graduate and undergraduate programs in health administration at the University of Illinois at Springfield. For ten years she was a member of the faculty and taught in the Health Services Administration and Women’s Studies Programs. Her focus was state health policy, health care organization, the history of health care reform and health problems facing rural communities.

Kathleen has experienced health care from all sides. Her first job was as a nursing assistant. She has worked in staff and management roles in a variety of settings including a university medical center, primary care, acute care, home care and long term care. As a farmer she and her family spent nearly two years without health insurance.

Kathleen is active in her community. She serves on the Mississippi River Regional Planning Commission and the Mississippi River Parkway Commission. She is a member of the Alma Chamber of Commerce and served on the boards of the Buffalo County Agricultural Fair Association and the Buffalo County Farm Bureau. She has been a member of the pastoral council of St. Lawrence Catholic Church, taught a weekly bible study class for eight years and is still a member of the church choir.

Kathleen is the eldest of five children. Both her parents served in the US Air Force. Her father was a member of the Laborer’s Union, her mother a registered nurse.

http://www.leadertelegram.com/news/front_page/article_ca41d828-1a91-5e06-ae6c-e0f65edc2faf.html

http://kathleenvinehout.org/

---

In a completely rational society, the best of us would be teachers and the rest of us would have to settle for something less, because passing civilization along from one generation to the next ought to be the highest honor and the highest responsibility anyone could have. -Lee Iacocca

I’ve heard so many bizarre and maddening stories about healthcare that nothing would really surprise me. Why don’t you ask her and report back to us rather than speculating. There’s a link to her website that must have a contact button. So, other than that you’d vote for her, right?

---

In a completely rational society, the best of us would be teachers and the rest of us would have to settle for something less, because passing civilization along from one generation to the next ought to be the highest honor and the highest responsibility anyone could have. -Lee Iacocca

Prior to posting right now, I went to Google and typed in "How many people in the US d" and before I could get another letter in Google finished the question for me: How many people in the US don't have health insurance? So, it's a fairly common question, don't you agree?

The answer is 46 million, so although it's quite possible that every one of them is some kind of loser with no personal responsibility, I suspect the 46,000,000 include a couple of honorable bootstrappers just like you . . . except for some reason they don't have health insurance.

I would actually be interested in the reason Vinehout went without it for two years. The answer might take me down a path I haven't traveled, and I always enjoy learning something new.

Edit: Sorry; I didn't answer your question. It doesn't make her more appealing. But it does tell me that she has a certain perspective on the subject I don't, never having gone without health insurance myself. If I were running for governor (don't get all excited - I'm not), and tweaking my bio (just imagine Newt Gingrich doing that with his army of spinners), I'd probably end up taking it out.

---

In a completely rational society, the best of us would be teachers and the rest of us would have to settle for something less, because passing civilization along from one generation to the next ought to be the highest honor and the highest responsibility anyone could have. -Lee Iacocca

Could be, but I bet she'd be a lot more successful - read "moderate" - in the promotion of her views on the subject than you are. For instance, she's probably not for taking the doctors out and shooting them.

---

In a completely rational society, the best of us would be teachers and the rest of us would have to settle for something less, because passing civilization along from one generation to the next ought to be the highest honor and the highest responsibility anyone could have. -Lee Iacocca

Good thing that abortion isn't legislated at the state level, and any Gov or potential Gov's views are irrelevant on the subject.

---

"...living in the sprawl. Big shopping malls rise like mountains, neon mountains. And there's no end in sight, I need the darkness someone please cut the lights." 'Sprawl II (Mountains) Arcade Fire

Isn't it great that once the Affordable Care Act is fully implemented, people won't have to choose between staying in safe jobs just for the health insurance and building their own businesses. Farm families like hers will be able to buy insurance through an exchange at a cost they can afford as they build the business and increase their income.

---

Hitchens’ Razor: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

It will depend on the size of the family, its income and the plan they choose. Exchanges have to offer three levels of coverage. The healthcare law provides a government subsidy for premiums for low income families. Someone who decides to start a business, as Ms. Vinehout did, will be able to buy insurance at low rates while growing the business. They might start in a Medicaid expansion program, shift to a subsidized commercial plan and finally assume the full cost of premiums once the business is producing high enough income. The figure would be 400% of FPL. There will be a non-profit option within each exchange that might offer the best value, though commercial insurers might match their premiums in order to make their own products more attractive.

This is the resource I use to understand the plan. I've posted it before. http://www.kff.org/healthreform/upload/8061.pdf

---

Hitchens’ Razor: What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Yeah but, what's the real difference between the two? If the current cost of health insurance is preventing you from starting your business, and the exchanges will unchain you from your safe job so you can start your business, I'd like to know how much money that is. Is it $100 cheaper? $500? $1,000? Can you narrow it down a little bit? You see, I don't really believe the cost saving, if any, is going to be enough to make a difference in whether or not someone starts their own business. Even the esteemed Sen. Vinehout didn't let the cost of her health insurance stop her from starting her business. I think anyone who says the cost of health insurance is chaining them to their safe job is just making excuses for not living their dreams.

Don't forget the group of folks who inherit businesses. Small business owners in general tend to be conservative as they see very clearly how much they lose to taxation as they are on tight budgets.

---

TT

You're right. It makes no sense to tie it to the employee/employer relationship.

Or tie it to whether we have a spouse or a parent with an employee/employer relationship.

That approach only makes sense as a way to subsidize desired social ends (marriage, population replacement, and employment, especially employment by a large corporation that forms a big enough group for economies of scale and risk sharing).

And as many have said, the notion of using insurance to pay for regular, recurring events instead of rare or unusual ones is pretty goofy. What would your homeowner's insurance go for if it covered painting, the cost of heating the house, and suchlike stuff?

---

Get off the teat?! We are the teat.