Health Care Reform

The news (CNN, Fox, NYT, etc.) has been overwrought with health care reform coverage. We've heard from the Democrats, the Republicans, the pundits, the Blue Dog Democrats, and everyone else who is willing to speak on it. And once you've finished reading this you will have heard from me.

I have been told by a few people who have known me for a good long while that they were surprised to find that when I moved to Texas my political nature blushed a little. In the waning years of high school I was a fairly liberal individual. One thing that hasn't changed is my support for health care for everyone, even to the point of socialized medicine.

I believe that in a perfect world where everyone is working for the good of society that everyone should obtain the benefits of the total work done. Inherent in that statement, everyone gets healthcare. Some people would say "What about those who don't work? Do they still get health care?" Yes.

Now I'm not blind to the problems of socialized medicine. The first being the cost. According to the Congressional Budget Office Director's Blog:

According to CBO’s and JCT’s assessment, enacting H.R. 3200 would result in a net increase in the federal budget deficit of $239 billion over the 2010-2019 period. That estimate reflects a projected 10-year cost of the bill’s insurance coverage provisions of $1,042 billion, partly offset by net spending changes that CBO estimates would save $219 billion over the same period, and by revenue provisions that JCT estimates would increase federal revenues by about $583 billion over those 10 years.

July 18, 2009

Granted, since this was posted, both the proposals in the house have been revised and even as this entry is typed the committees are debating and line iteming this bill. So, the hard question - "Who pays for this?" My easy answer is, we all do. If you think about it, insurance premiums are where they are because of a number of factors, the uninsured, our litigious society, "defensive medicine" (as a result of our litigious society), our lack of preventative measures like eating right, exercising, quitting smoking, moderation with alcohol, etc. So all in all we are already footing the bill for those who aren't covered, so why not admit it and acknowledge it outright.

The second big question, "Who is in control?" The answer that is being debated is the government option. Put the government in charge of medicine. One side says, "Why not? Then we can control costs." The other side says, "Look at what control we've already given them. They've screwed up Social Security, Medicare, education, Veteran Health care..." I think both sides have points here. Privatized health care has run rampant over patient rights. But the government could do the same thing. While no one wants to admit cost vs. value in a healthcare situation is life and death. Is the government really going to give society a blank check when it comes to healthcare options? Who is going to make sure that the government run healthcare is doing good by us? Another government oversight agency? The conservative base will just lose it if that happens.

I thought it sad that in the documentary Fahrenheit 911, regardless of what you think of Michael Moore, a United States citizen couldn't get treatment here but could take a boat to Cuba, and receive medical services without charge.

Why wouldn't a citizen who can afford it want to help a fellow man? If I knew that my contributions to an insurance plan would help someone who needed it, especially since I don't need it now being a strapping healthy young individual, I would absolutely pay into something like that.

Many of my friends say that I give too much benefit of doubt, that I am too trusting, and maybe I am. But I think a refusal to do so is just a fear that the person you might help wouldn't do the same for you in a reversed situation. How many people don't eat, get a doctors care, get a hug because of that lack of trust. Forgive me for thinking that people as a whole are good natured and willing to do the right thing.

Do I think that a government run healthcare system that allows everyone, and I do mean everyone, healthcare without question? No, at least it isn't the only option. But something needs to change and needs to change fast.

Teachers! Here you go!

Harvard Professor Arrested...For Being Black?

On July 16, 2009, a 911 call reported a potential break in to Cambridge dispatch. An officer reported to scene. Henry Louis Gates Jr., a Harvard Scholar, was arrested for disorderly conduct. Since then the media has reported about the racial aspect of the case. What made this situation racial? A white man was the arresting officer.

I am not going to pretend that this country has moved on from is racist roots. I won't. I'm from western Pennsylvania and went to college in central Pennsylvania. Ever big wheel truck there has a confederate flag license plate, and not because they like General Lee. Racism is certainly alive and well in America. But can we cry racism here? I won't come to any hard conclusions because I wasn't there. But I do want to propose giving our peace officers the benefit of the doubt.

If my neighbors saw me banging on my door they might call the cops. My neighbors don't know me. Now if a cop shows up to investigate a potential break in, I am going to be on my best behavior. I have been taught to absolutely respect the authority of the police. If I begin yelling at the officer or accusing him of things, I show myself as a potential threat and can then be detained. I can also be detained if I am getting in the way of the officer completing his duty. The difference between this hypothetical situation and the one that occurred on the 16th is that I am a caucasian male and Professor Gates is an African American. There is something referred to in race studies as white privilege. This states that I will be given more benefit of doubt than an african american would, all things being equal aside from race. I would love to believe that this is just theory but if you look close enough at our society you will see it. This is another blog entry all to its own.

There are two versions of the story. Gates' version and the arresting Officer Crowley's version. And my mother in her infinite wisdom told me, "in divorce there are always two sides, and neither is the complete truth. You'll find elements of truth in both, but neither will be all the way." I have no doubt that it is true in this situation as well.

"The police and Professor Gates offered differing accounts of what happened after officers arrived. Professor Gates said that he had shown photo identification to Sergeant Crowley but that the sergeant had appeared not to believe that he lived there. Frustrated, Professor Gates said, he asked for the name and badge number of Sergeant Crowley, who, he said, refused to give them.

By the police account, Professor Gates initially refused to show identification, and Sergeant Crowley did provide his name. When told that Sergeant Crowley was investigating the possibility of a break-in, the police said, Professor Gates yelled, “Why, because I’m a black man in America?” and accused the sergeant of racism. Professor Gates followed the officer from the inside of the house onto the porch, yelling at him, the police report said."
---Harvard Scholar Won’t Be Charged By KATIE ZEZIMA and ABBY GOODNOUGH NYTIMES

The situation ended with the professor being arrested and initially charged with disorderly conduct. The charges have since been dropped. But the situation has been blown up and has reignited the racial discussion. Even the President has weighed in on the situation.

"I don't know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played," Obama said Wednesday night while taking questions after a White House news conference. "But I think it's fair to say, No. 1, any of us would be pretty angry; No. 2, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, No. 3 ... that there's a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately."

I applaud Obama for not making a judgement call and admitting that he did not know "not having been there and not seeing all of the facts." This shows good temperament. And he's right. I would've been angry in that situation. But his number two bothers me. To come out and accused the police of "act[ing] stupidly" immediately after admitting that he "did not know" seems contradictory and political. The charge he was arrested for was disorderly conduct after the proof was presented. He wasn't arrested for being in his own home.

All things considered, breaking into your own home isn't illegal. But a responding officer has an obligation to get the entire story, thus must be allowed to do a thorough investigation. If someone breaks into my house and when the responding officer shows up, the burglar says he is my house sitter and the officer leaves allowing him to steal my computers and music equipment, I would be far more pissed off than if he had put me in cuffs and sat me down out of his way to complete his investigation.

If we begin to second guess our police forces, as we have for a while now, we take their authority away. Many of us don't like the police. They get in our way when we are late by pulling us over for speeding in a school zone. They arrest us when we act stupid downtown after drinking a little too much. We jokingly, or not so jokingly, call them pigs. But why do we have police forces in the first place? They are there to protect and serve. The police officer who responded to the call was doing his job. If we assume that the arrest was racially motivated then we have to suspect everything the police do. If we can't assume that our police will uphold the law then why do we have them? Have their been cops that have abused their authority? Yes. Are there cops who are still cops that abuse their power? Yes. Is every police officer subject to suspicion? No. By giving them the badge we trust them to always tell the truth and to uphold the honor of that badge. They have earned our trust by completing the academy and completing their training. When we take it away, we give strength to the criminals they are trying to protect us against.

In conclusion, I have no idea what went on a week ago in the living room of Gates' house. I hope the officer was doing his job, for his sake and society's. We need to remember that with the badge comes our trust, without it the police are useless.

History is dying

I have these big huge discoveries every once in a while. These discoveries are nothing that anyone wouldn't know automatically but when something brings these thoughts to the forefront of my mind it is blown.

Really, the idea that the people who were born a while ago will die before me is not a new idea. This article from CNN is what started this whole mind blowing line of thinking.
World's oldest man, WWI vet, dies aged 113

"Henry Allingham, the world's oldest man and the oldest surviving British veteran from World War I, has died at the age of 113, his care home said Saturday." In the TV segment devoted to this story, the reporter said that he was one of two still living World War I vets in the UK. These guys are a endangered historical resource. I began pulling history forward and seeing the future. Someday the world will be without any World War II vets and Holocaust survivors. In our lifetime we will see Vietnam Vets go the same way. And in the waning years of my hopefully long life I will see veterans of the first Gulf War fade into the print of history books.

I suppose I realized this a while ago. Every summer we visit my Grandparents in Mississippi. On my mother's side, my grandfather was in Vietnam disarming explosive ordinance. I was about seventeen when I realized that someday he would pass silently into memory and he would no longer be able to tell his story. So that summer I had intentions of buying a tape recorder and asking him all about his experiences. While I didn't get the tape recorder, I did question him extensively about his experience and insight into the Vietnam War. While he was traumatically sent home after receiving a Purple Heart, he spoke jovially about what went on over there.

I realize now that I am slowly but surely moving back to the topic of Legacy. History and Legacy can almost be synonyms. Well, maybe not but they can certainly go hand in hand.

That same day it was reported that the community of journalism had lost a great one of its own. Walter Cronkite, died on July 17, 2009 at the age of 92. It has been said that video and other media will replace text. If the same true in education, then Walter Cronkite will certainly be the author of the history "text books" used in the coming years for history from World War II until the early eighties.

History is fading into the past...and there's nothing you can do about it.

Bedroom Update

For the Record....

I moved in...

Well I started to anyway. I am far from calling myself moved in, but during the first week of June I began to move my things from my overpriced one bedroom apartment into a house that is reasonable. This is where I've gotten since June 3rd.






I have to be honest. It's been a little more organized than that and usually only turns into this mess when I decide to do some moving in.

The problem is my bookshelves. I have a small set of book shelves. I am struggling with filling them. You see most of my stuff is books. As I began to put books into the shelves I realized I was putting all of my dad's books into the shelves. He was a Tom Clancy and Robert A. Heinlein fan. I have all of his old books. I probably have 75% of Clancy's offerings and about half of them are 1st prints. Some of the Heinlein books are first prints as well. My struggle is this, I want my shelves to reflect my literary tastes but I don't want to off load these books. First of all, I don't want to get rid of anything that used to be my father's. I have some serious pack rat habits when it comes to things that were his. It took me two years to go through half of his files. It'll probably take me another two the get through the rest. On top of the sentimental value, there of practical value. About two thirds of these books are first editions which makes them collectors items. But I am not a book collector, nor do I have the room to become one. I would love to keep them but I hate keeping books in boxes.

Here then is my question: Do I keep the books, in boxes or otherwise? If I get rid of them, how do I find their true monetary value so as not to get ripped off?

Ultimately, the goal is to have a room I can live in, but these quandaries always make me stop and stress me out.

Onwards and Upwards.