Previously: Why healthcare reform?

Since the spread of Communism, there’s not one term that can get a group of right-wingers into a tizzy more than “socialism.”

For them, everything that helps the poor is “socialist” and every requirement made on citizens is “socialist.”

While I’m sure those in charge of the Republican Party know that the Obama healthcare plan is no more socialist than, say, car insurance, they do know that their followers will believe this claim, especially when it’s repeated over and over again on Fox News and conservative talk radio.

Socialism is definitely not inherently evil like some folks would like you to believe.

Social security, public education, Medicare, Medicaid and unemployment insurance are all examples of socialist programs because they promote a redistribution of wealth. And they have all improved Americans’ standards of living.

However, the healthcare reform taking shape in Washington, D.C. is not socialist. It’s not even close.

Those saying as much are doing little more than committing that fallacy of appealing to the strongest of human emotions—fear.

Healthcare reform in the form of HR 3200 is not a redistribution of wealth, nor is it vehicle of creating state control over an individual’s healthcare plan.

Instead, the healthcare reform before Congress does the following:

1. Requires every individual be covered under an acceptable plan or incur a 2.5 percent tax.
2. Prohibits insurance companies from excluding clients because of “pre-existing conditions.”
3. Requires employers to cover their employees under a plan, or incur an 8 percent tax.”
4. Ensures that those happy with their current medical coverage can keep it.
5. Provides subsidies to individuals and small businesses to help cover costs.
6. Provides a public option for health insurance. Basically Medicare and Medicaid for everyone.
7. Improves the information technology systems being used in hospitals, clinics and other medical facilities.

I know most conservatives have issues with increased taxes, and requirements for coverage. And they most definitely will have a problem with any “public option” that is included to any bill that makes it to the president’s desk, which is the most “socialist” aspect of the bill.

Taxing the uninsured and their employers is the best way to make sure that those of us who are insured and who are paying into Medicare and Medicaid aren’t seeing increased amounts taken from our paychecks because of the excessive use of emergency rooms.

It’s not socialism. It’s responsible citizenship.

Although the analogy isn’t exact, the comparison of required health insurance requirements to those placed on vehicle owners is apt.

I can’t imagine anything more annoying than being rear-ended by an uninsured driver. He’d try to help out with the costs, maybe, but more than likely, he’ll disappear, or if the police come, receive a ticket, get his car impounded, but leave me with the bill to replace my bumper.

We expect the other drivers on the road to have car insurance because it’s best for all drivers.

While it might be inconvenient to pay $70+ per month on something you hope never to use, not having it would mean being an irresponsible citizen.

Personally, I’m shocked at the outcry regarding the healthcare reform.

Liberals are pretty angry at President Obama for taking the single-payer system off the table before debate actually began. I’ll get to this in a few days.

Instead, he decided to focus on fixing the current system. The plan looks nothing like those in Canada or Europe.

It’s unlikely any American will be hurt financially by the reforms. Most of the increased taxes we may see, should be offset by the decreased amounts we’ll need to pay for the uninsured visiting emergency rooms.

The only folks who may be hurt financially by reform are the insurance companies. By requiring them to cover all-comers, and not exclude those with pre-existing conditions, because they’ll be forced to treat patients who need care, not just those who pay for insurance and rarely use it.

Next: The myths—government takeovers, state-funded abortions, and geriatric genocide.

Barack Obama does not want to kill your grandmother or your unborn child.

Relax. Breathe. Repeat.

Barack Obama does NOT want to kill your grandmother or your unborn child.

The president also does not want to take over your current health coverage and replace it with a government-run plan.

I know. I know.

You’re saying, “But the guy on Fox News told me that he does!”

Or, “That guy giving the speech outside one of those town hall meetings said that Obama is the next Hitler or Stalin and he was wondering what the American holocaust would be called. He seemed so convincing!”

Unfortunately, if you believe these things, you’ve been lied to. You’ve been the pawn of special interest groups. You’ve been hoodwinked and bamboozled by the Republican lying machine.

If you don’t believe me, look at HR 3200, America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, which was recently introduced to Congress. I know it’s lawyer talk and can be confusing, but nowhere will you see the words “abortion” and “euthanasia.”

But more about this later.

Over the next few days, I’ll try to explain why this healthcare reform is actually a good thing, what this reform actually is, why fears regarding state-funded abortions and increased euthanizations for the elderly are unfounded scare tactics, and why liberal cries of “single-payer,” while well-meaning, are pipe dreams.

We will get to the lies and misconceptions, and actually look to see what “reform” means, but before that, it’s important to discuss why reform is actually needed.

We’re No. 1 (in health expenditures)!

During the last few weeks, I don’t know how many times I’ve heard critics of health reform say, “They want to make the U.S. system look like those in Europe or Canada.”

Yes, please!

Unfortunately, this reform won’t go that far, but why wouldn’t the American politicians want to emulate the systems from Europe or Canada?

All of those mostly public systems are cheaper and more effective than the mostly private American system.

Reality is that the American healthcare system is broken. It’s been broken for years. It’s too expensive and excludes too many people.

In fact, the United States is the only developed country in the world that lacks universal coverage.

An estimated that 15 percent, or 45.7 million Americans lack coverage (link opens a PDF).

There are several reasons why so many Americans remain uninsured. The primary one being cost.

Most of the uninsured live in households that make less than $50,000 per year.

But at least 5 million Americans are uninsurable because of “pre-existing conditions.” In addition, there are an estimated 8 million uninsured children and an estimated 8 million uninsured young adults.

Healthcare reform should bridge this gap in coverage.

According to 2005 numbers from the World Health Organization, the United States spent 15.5 percent of its gross domestic product on health. Canada, which has mostly a publicly funded system, which covers all of its citizens, spent 9.7 percent of its GDP on health.

What? That has to be a mistake.

Let’s look at other publicly run systems. France? 11.2 percent of its GDP on health. The United Kingdom? 8.2 percent of its GDP. Sweden? 9.2 percent.

So the question that begs asking is why does it cost so much more in the United States?

It comes back to the uninsured, which leads to the excessive use of emergency care. The costs of these visits, which run into the thousands of dollars per hour, are then passed on to the American taxpayer.

In addition, lack of preventive care in this country and the failure of technological advancement to spread to the health industry, also increase to the troubled system.

A recent study by the Commonwealth Fund, a nonprofit organization with the goal of “working toward a high performance health system,” ranked the United States last among 18 developed countries in healthcare.

In a smaller survey of six countries—the United States, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Germany, Canada, and Australia—the U.S. system ranked last or next to last in quality care, access, efficiency, equity, healthy lives, and cost.

The steps taken in the House bill would do much to alleviate these problems and substantially improve the American system.

Tomorrow. The lies and misconceptions about reform.

I never thought I’d write this: President George W. Bush had it right.

When the opposition gave him a difficult time doing something, he’d say, “F— you, we’re doing it anyway.” Think warrantless wiretaps, tax cuts for the wealthy, Iraq.

And if he had the votes in Congress, he’d say, “F— bipartisanship and pleasing the opposition. We’re doing this my way, bitches.”

This is where President Barack Obama is very different from Bush, and why his healthcare reform plans are in trouble.

He’s a pleaser. He’s the type of leader who will always try to find the middle ground. This is actually the reason I voted for him, and the reason I knew hardcore liberals would be pissed at him.

This is also the reason why he wants these small steps of reform before he tackled anything as revolutionary as a single-payer system.

But I think it’s time for Obama to say, “F— you. We’re doing health care reform my way.”

Of course he’d go on to explain why it’s the right thing to do: it’d insure the uninsured, it’d remove health care discrimination, it’d make health care more affordable for all Americans, and it’d make healthier nation. Then he’d explain that while the price tag might be costly, it’ll be worth it in the long run.

“We can’t just run our nation for the present,” he’d say. “But we have to prepare for our futures.”

But he hasn’t, and my guess is that he probably won’t tell the Republicans, and the Blue Dog Democrats that make up most of the vocal opposition to fall in line. He won’t tell them that he’ll force the most liberal version of healthcare reform down their throats if they don’t support this tiny bit of reform.

Instead, he’ll continue to say, “I want a health care reform bill on my desk before August.”

The Senate and House will continue to wrangle out differences among themselves. The Blue Dogs and GOP will continue to fight over the “public option” and everyday these people will feel more empowered.

Come August, or right when Congress comes back for break, we’ll see a health care bill on Obama’s desk. It won’t be great. It won’t be bad either. It’ll have some necessary reforms that will improve this nation’s healthcare system.

But it probably won’t have the public option that is necessary to make this successful reform.

Since the president placed health care reform front and center in his first term, and with 60 Democratic Senators and a 79-seat majority in Congress, any plan that falls short of the goals laid out in his campaign for presidency is a loss and something that will hurt during midterm elections.

Obama needs to take a page out of the Bush playbook and remember that this is a battle Dick Cheney and others in the Bush White House would never lose.

For the past week or so, I’ve been trying to figure out how to say goodbye to the Bush Administration. I thought of making a list of all the environmental policies instituted by previous administrations that the Bush Administration threw by the wayside. I felt like compiling a list of civil liberties ignored for the sake of “national security.” I even thought of listing the names of the troops who have died while serving in an unnecessary war in Iraq. Then I came to the realization: Bush is gone tomorrow. Who cares?

Jan. 20, 2009 will be a day remembered decades from now. It’s the day that the United States returns to its place as the world’s standard-bearer for liberty and opportunity. It’s the day that that all-encompassing word of “hope” returns to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. So there is no room to obsess over the years of harm that were the Bush Administration.

But as Barack Obama takes the oath of office, he also takes on one of the most daunting jobs a president has ever inherited.

• There are two wars
• The world is in its worst financial crisis since the Great Depression
• Millions of Americans are unemployed
• The financial system is in ruin
• Global climate change is rearing its ugly head more and more
• We’re realizing that the world’s energy usage must change to something more sustainable
• Some people still sit in prison despite not being charged with crimes
• Partisanship is as bad as its been in centuries
• Morale in the military is at an all-time low
• Russia is becoming a bully in Eastern Europe
• The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is reaching catostrophic levels

I didn’t even mention one of the biggest pressures: being the first black man to lead this nation.

So, there really is no time to dwell on the Bush Administration. It’s time to work. And after Obama and America celebrates today, it’s time for all of us to get to work to make our country a better place to live.

So it looks pretty official that Prop. 8 passed. However, I think those in favor of it should hold off on the bubbly, and those against it should hold off on the rioting.

Here’s why:

1. There will be lawsuits filed tomorrow (or whenever this amendment takes effect) in Federal Court. And I guarantee that an injunction will be placed on this amendment taking effect.

2. The commercials in favor of Prop. 8 and the arguments made by those in favor always included the phrase, “Liberal judges in Sacramento overturned the voters’ will.” Wrong. Six of the seven California justices were appointed by Republicans. They found that Prop 22 violated the equal protection clause – the law that ended “separate but equal.”

3. The lawsuits will make it to the US Supreme Court. And I believe that the court could easily overturn the California Constitutional amendment and as a result would require ALL states to recognize same-sex marriages.

How would that be for a kick in the ass?

I really don’t know what to say… but here’s my  Jan. 20-June 20 agenda:

1. Pass a public works bill. Put people back to work.

2. Pass an energy bill putting an emphasis on the construction of solar- and wind-power plants.

3. Pass the DREAM Act. Give the children of immigrants the right they deserve.

4. Pass comprehensive immigration reform with an emphasis on workers.

5. Pass a bill banning prescription drug advertising.

6. Pass a bill requiring to give presidential and state candidates free airtime during elections.

7. Pass a line-item veto authorization bill. Get rid of wasteful spending – line-by-line. No more bridges to nowhere.

8. In the new Iraq War spending bill, put a timetable on the withdrawal of troops.

9. Repeal the Bush tax cuts.

Extra: One more round of stimulus checks! JK.

Go Obama. I have never been so proud of my country.

California Ballot

President/Vice President – Barack Obama/Joe Biden

Proposition 1A – Yes – High-speed train travel is the way of the future. Job creation is No. 1 in a struggling economy and this proposal will create hundreds of thousands of jobs.

Proposition 2 – Yes – Healthier, happier animals equal healthier, better-tasting meat.

Proposition 3 – Yes – Children’s Hospital Bond? How can you say no?

Proposition 4 – No – Uh oh. Here’s a controversial one. Let’s face it, any girl who has a decent to good relationship with a parent will confide her pregnancy to her mother or father. The privacy clause regarding abortion has nothing to do with “predators” unless that predator is the girl’s father or step-father. In addition, teenagers go to lengths to conceal their grades from their parents. What would they do to conceal an abortion?

Proposition 5 – Yes – Treatment for drug offenders is always preferable to locking them up. Heck, there are more drugs in jails than there are on the streets.

Proposition 6 – No – Another step toward a police state.

Proposition 7 – No – On the surface I like this bill a lot. But the Sierra Club, the NRDC and some other respectable environmental groups say it’s seriously flawed. I’m going to take their word for it.

Proposition 8 – No – I think the Bachelor, Who Wants to Marry a Millionaire?, and Desperate Housewives does more to harm marriage than allowing a couple of gays and lesbians the opportunity to have all the rights heterosexual couples do. Churches will always be allowed to say no to gay marriages within their doors.

Proposition 9 – No – Another police state measure.

Proposition 10 – Yes – The benefits far outweigh the costs ($10 billion in bonds and interest). Alternative energy research creates jobs.

Proposition 11 – Yes – State contests must be much more competitive. Politicians will be forced to move toward the middle and compromise more on divisive issues.

Proposition 12 – Yes – Vets are out there serving our country. We need to serve them when they come home.

When the Obama campaign released its statement about the $150 million from individuals (with an average donation of $86) that had been donated to his campaign in the month of September alone, I couldn’t help but wonder what would happen if the Obama campaign turned into the Obama Community Organization in November.

The more than half-a-billion dollars Obama has raised has been a direct result of applying community organizing to fund raising. The advantage Obama now enjoys in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania, not to mention the red states that have become competive, all have to do with the ability of the local campaign offices being able to organize an army of volunteers to go door-to-door to ask for votes.

What if all of the Obama campaign offices transformed into non-partisan, non-legislative community organization offices under the discretion of the President of the United States in every major and medium-sized city throughout the country?

Talk about localizing the federal government to help citizens.

Imagine just a few of the possibilities: lawyers-to-be helping hopeful immigrants fill out paperwork; employment offices working directly through local federal government offices to bring the unemployed and the hiring businesses together; adoption agencies connecting hopeful parents with reluctant parents; students having a place to go to talk about the Peace Corps and Americorps in person; experts hosting workshops in filing financial aid forms.

And the army is there. There are millions of college students who could use $4,000 per year in college savings by volunteering at least 100 hours at one of these organizations.

Here are all my tweets during debate No. 3 with some explanation:

Post-debate

- In 20 days, at this time, all the networks would have already declared Barack Obama president-elect. Can’t wait.

• Under all reasonable polling data, Obama has a 95 percent chance of winning on Nov. 4.

- BTW, that poll said Obama won 2-1 again.

- cbs poll said 58 percent are STILL undecided… my recommendation. Just skip the presidential vote.

• McCain needed to win BIG TIME tonight. He failed to do so.

- two thumbs up for Bob Schieffer… best moderator. #current

• I may need to watch Face the Nation much more.

Education

- GW Bush supported vouchers and had a GOP Congress for six years. Still no vouchers. #current

- current I’m a private school teacher at a school with declining enrollment. I don’t support vouchers.

• During the last few presidential election, Republican candidates have promoted vouchers. The last Gallup Poll on education in 2006 showed that only 2 percent of Americans thought school vouchers would be the best way to fix education, while 17 percent believed better teachers and a more basic curriculum were the best ways to improve the system.

Visual Presentation

- Obama has completely dominated McCain toward the end of this debate. #current

- visually, Obama is much more presidential. #current

- McCain has completely lost it

- why does McCain keep rolling his eyes? for the old candidate, that’s pretty immature.

• The moment of the debate didn’t come when John McCain said, “If you wanted to debate George Bush, you should’ve run four years ago. Rather it came when Barack Obama said Joe the Plumber wouldn’t have to pay his employees anything. McCain said, “It wouldn’t?” And when Obama went on to explain the small business exemption, McCain looked shocked. Here’s the video:

Abortion

- Orwellian moment: pro-choice does not equal pro-abortion #current

- Lake of Fire… everyone needs to watch that movie about abortion

• McCain wants to paint abortion as a black and white issue. It’s not. That’s why I recommend everyone watch Lake of Fire. There are several ethical issues involved in the abortion debate and those are explored in that movie. In addition, the anti-abortion movement has really done an excellent job at painting “pro-choice” as “pro-abortion.” This is just like calling someone voting against the Iraq War as someone who supports terrorism.

Taxes and health care

- I don’t trust ME with my money. I’d rather buy TVs, cars and video games than health care.

- If Joe makes $250,000, he’s in the top 5 percent of all American wage earners.

• Both of these are completely true. Look around America and most people are like me. Just look at the most irresponsible of all purchases – the SUV. If Americans could be trusted with their money, they wouldn’t buy SUVs and unaffordable luxury homes.
• If I earned $250,000 per year, I wouldn’t mind paying a bit more in taxes.

- Me, a single individual, has to pay $5,000 on my tax plan… poor families. #current

- McCain: Liar, liar! Zero! It’s federally mandated!

- I wonder if there IS a Joe the Plumber… it’s probably Palin’s husband.

- My guess on McCain’s response: THAT BOY wants to have a mandated federal-run health care system. Mine is a tax cut.

• McCain’s tax credit would do nothing for me. Obama’s would give me a few more dollars in my pocket every month.

I get some Republicans: they’re for lower taxes more deregulation and more states’ rights. That’s the traditional Republican thought process, and I get it. I don’t find fault with it (other than I think it’s wrong.)

But there’s another, more complicated process when one becomes a member of the GOP. They join the party because of the idea that the GOP supports “family values” – code word for anti-abortion, anti-gay, and, really anti-anything having to do with sex.

There’s also the traditional tags Republicans label the Democratic Party with. They call it the party of higher taxes. The “tax and spenders.” They say Democrats are “socialists.” The more extreme call the Democrats “baby killers.” The Democratic Party is the “party of the handout.”

Unfortunately for the GOP, the Democratic Party, at least the portion of it I belong to, are none of those things. For me, being a Democrat means looking forward. Being a Democrat means learning from past mistakes and trying new ideas, or repeating ideas that worked. Being a Democrat means trying to give everyone an equal chance at the elusive American Dream.

And more than ever, that (little “d”) democratic dream for America is needed more than ever now. Not to be Captain Obvious or anything, but this country is struggling. Heck, the whole world is struggling because of the problems in this nation.

And no one in this country is struggling more than average Jane and Joe. It’s Jane and Joe who get hurt the most from the $75 gas tank. They’re the ones who have to pull their kids from private school because they can’t afford the tuition anymore. They’re the ones who had to cancel next summer’s vacation because plane fare is just too much.

But they’re also the ones who get the economy going. They buy the midsize car, the PS3’s, and the flat-screen TV’s. They’re the ones who put the money into the economy. And they’ll be the one’s who will be helped under Obama’s tax policy.

See, at the end of the day, the Democratic Party isn’t about negativity and partisanship. Rather it’s about hopes and ideals. And that’s why I’m a Democrat. I hope that this country can once again be a “beacon of light” for the rest of the world. I’m about what could be, not what was.

And that’s why this campaign is where it’s at today with John McCain’s negative ads having very little bearing on the polls.

If one takes a good look at electoral history, when times are good (usually after a Democratic presidency), Americans say, “Hey, I want more. The Republican Party promises to lower my taxes. I’m voting Republican.”

Or, as it did during Bush-Gore, W painted himself as someone trustworthy, compassionate, and full of those “family values.” As a result, Bush barely lost to Gore in what should have been a Democratic landslide.

During this campaign, when times are awful and the GOP is on the ropes, what do we see? We see hatred. We hear words like “you can’t trust him” and “he’s a man of the streets.” We see a campaign based primarily on fear of the unknown.

This time, as in years past, the economy is trumping all negative advertising and this election is shaping up to be an historic landslide. The voters have said, “Enough! We’re voting for the future this time.” And that’s where I stand.