Summer Thinking on Health Care Reform III

I recently finished an extremely informative article on health care that will be published in the September 2009 edition of The Atlantic. I STRONGLY encourage everyone to read it. David Goldhill, is a businessman who details what happened to his father, and then moves on to try to explain, from a business perspective, the roots of the problems with the American health care system. He ends his article with suggestions for beginning to tackle our health care problems in a meaningful way.

As one who is still studying this issue, and is still of the mind that a single payer system properly administered would be a good way for Americans to receive health care, I felt the beginnings of a mind change when I finished Goldhill's article. I realized that this is precisely what I hope for when it comes to important issues. I want to be challenged. I want information that will force me to reconsider my presumptions. Goldhill's article did that in a way that not a single member of the Hill has done. I also think that could appeal to quite a few people. I was also reminded of the disservice that we as Americans are experiencing as this "debate" on health care reform continues.

What could have been a discussion on topics like those introduced by Goldhill, and led by the White House, has become pure political theater, and bad theater at that. I am looking at BHO and wondering what happened.

At the beginning of the year, the overwhelming majority of Americans wanted health care reform of some kind. This was the best opportunity to do something meaningful. Yet, here we are in the middle of a public relations nightmare. I fully understand Cenk Uygur's comments in his post on the political weakness of the Democratic party (even when the stars align in their favor), especially since it seems clear that the GOP has no intention of supporting any bill that emerges this fall in Congress.

Last I checked, the Democrats have a super majority in Congress. Technically, they do not need Republican support for any measure they want. Remember what happened when the situation was nearly the reverse under Bush from 2001-2007? Imagine the GOP in the current Democratic position. The Democrats wouldn't even be consulted, and the more conservative Dems would be climbing over one another to look bi-partisan.

That the debate on health care reform has essentially been reduced to discussions about non-existent "death panels," and protestations against the "public option," shows how pitiful this whole thing has become. On this, I do blame the White House for not putting forth its own plan that could be shopped around among the Democratic congressional leadership. It also rings hollow when BHO talks about "a plan," because we already know that there are potentially five plans with different components coming from the Hill. This discrepancy only adds fuel to the fire of those who simply want health care reform stopped (something that few of these protesters understand, I think), and fans the flames of fear for these protestors.

For the time that remains during the congressional recess, I hope that Democrats will begin to make more substantive arguments, and that BHO will more aggressively beat back these lies, scare tactics, and bullying coming from the right. I would love to see BHO and other Democrats challenge the GOP on the merits.

Finally, I think that Rachel Maddow, with guest Matt Taibbi (love him!), really hit the nail on the head. Though good questions can be asked about the efficacy of the public option, the White House should have been doing a better job of orchestrating this process, knowing the limitations of this Congress.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

You Want "Your" Country Back From What Exactly? II

Since today was a travel day for me, I didn't have the opportunity to get the video clips from Fox News and Hardball with the young woman, Katy Abram, who asked Sen. Specter to restore the country back to what the Founding Fathers created. I found this clip on Fox News that was taped right after the town hall meeting:

I finished that clip still confused by what it is that Abram thinks is "really" happening in this country that "scares the life out of [her]."

So, I looked forward to reviewing the Hardball clip to see if Abram really addressed that, or if O'Donnell really asked her. Here is the Abram interview conducted by Lawrence O'Donnell:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

I thought that O'Donnell's questions were reasonable, but I still don't know what scares her about what is happening in the country right now. O'Donnell was gracious in making sure that Abram could feel as comfortable as possible. Hell, I would be nervous on national television. But, I remain unsatisfied.

I liked that O'Donnell took her comment to its logical conclusion with regard to Social Security and Medicare. Perhaps the opponents of health care reform, particularly those who cry "socialism" or "socialized medicine," should really consider advocating for opting out of those socialistic programs already in existence. Maybe it would be worthwhile to consider legislation that would allow people to opt out. I think some of my conservative and libertarian friends might find this an interesting prospect.

So, I'm still longing for an explanation of what is so frightening about what is happening in this country. I just don't see any reason to feel like the United States, with regard to health care reform proposals, is in danger of no longer being the country we all know and love.

Now a review of the last eight years might yield much more material for consideration when it comes to worrying about the potential loss of the country we know and love. Perhaps it good that Abram only just started paying attention to politics. Lord knows what she would have felt like if she'd been paying attention during the Bush years.

You Want "Your" Country Back From What Exactly?

I'll keep this short and sweet. During some of these town hall meetings on health care reform, I have heard people all but crying out the following statement: "I want my country back." What exactly do they mean? They want their country back from whom?

It would be too easy, and I think incorrect (mostly), to argue that these are people who simply aren't mentally able to process the fact that a bi-racial man of African descent, who is married to a multi-generational (and allegedly grievance ridden) black American woman, was elected POTUS. But something is driving this. I just don't know what it is.

Here is Jon Stewart's humorous take on it (and I love the montage of the commentary on the right regarding opposition to the run-up to the Iraq War).

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Healther Skelter
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Spinal Tap Performance

Though I was no fan of George W. Bush, and I thought that the comparisons of Dick Cheney to Darth Vader and/or Voldemort were almost apt, I don't think that I ever felt the level of fear that these folks seem to be displaying. It is genuinely fascinating.

Any thoughts?

UPDATE: Here is video from yesterday's "Hardball with Chris Matthews" that inspired this post:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

My High School Years and John Hughes' Films

So I leave town for a few days, and I find out that John Hughes passed away. When I heard the news, I saw flashes of "Sixteen Candles," "The Breakfast Club," "Pretty In Pink," "Weird Science" and "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" in my head for the next few days.

Those movies were so central to my high school experience. Molly Ringwald and I are the same age, and I loved the fact that her characters and I were in the same year of high school each time. I was totally taken in by the world Hughes created. I finally understood what my older cousins felt when they talked about their love for the movie "Cooley High."

I remember clamoring for the soundtracks from the movies, because Hughes had the best taste in music (Thompson Twins, Psychedelic Furs, New Order, INXS, Echo and the Bunnymen, Wang Chung, The Smiths, and of course Simple Minds, just to name a few). My love of Suzanne Vega, for example, begins with "Left of Center" on the "Pretty In Pink" soundtrack.

Like the girls and closeted gay boys around me, I wanted my own "Jake Ryan" from "Sixteen Candles." My friends were a combination of the "Brain," "Princess" and "Athlete" from the "Breakfast Club." And who did not want Cameron's house from "Ferris Bueller's Day Off?" I wouldn't have minded Cameron either.

Though Hughes also wrote "National Lampoon's Vacation" and "Home Alone," both incredible films, it was Hughes' perspective on the American high school that will be his most significant legacy. I feel privileged to have been there to see it on screen first hand, and I will be having a little Hughes movie fest really soon (I'll make sure to have some wine coolers for the occasion).

Here are some of the tunes of the time, and may John Hughes rest in peace:

Summer Thinking on Health Care Reform II

I thought that Maddow provided an excellent analysis, last night, of the fracases happening at town hall meetings of Democratic members of Congress across the country. What conservative pundit Michelle Malkin called a grass roots effort, Maddow shows is not really the case.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

In continuing her analysis of these protests from the right, Maddow provides a breakdown of who participated in the "grass roots effort" to stop the recount of votes in Miami, Florida back in 2000, which I found illuminating; it illustrates the capacity of the GOP to organize protests, and then tell the media that they are grass roots efforts (even when made up of GOP Congressional and political staff members, who most likely are not from the district where the protests are being held).

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Of course, we all agree that people have the right to question their elected officials on all issues related to the work those officials are elected to do. I've signed petitions and attended meetings about issues of interest to me. But I think that it is folly to believe that all of these protests in the last few days are genuine grass roots efforts that emerged organically within those communities (check out this post on the site Crooks and Liars, and this post from The Plum Line). "Astroturf" is the term being bandied about to describe this effort from the right. Seemingly, the ghosts from 2000 have emerged once again.

Clearly, there are all sorts of questions to ask about the effort to reform the health insurance industry (I don't know if health care reform is the proper term anymore), and they need to be asked. Yet, as one can see from the footage of those town halls, there is no dialog, only shouting and accusations. So, I would suggest to those organizing the town hall disruptions to come armed, not with random commentary about socialism and government run health care, but with say some of the examples provided by Congressman Tom Price (see here) with his "Empowering Patients First Act," and then discussing the merits of the various plans. That's what is supposed to happen at town hall meetings; those types of meetings have the prospect of being productive.

This current madness? Not so much.

Regarding the Black Church

I'd an interesting conversation with my mother a few years ago. On the television was some black minister preaching, and my mother turned to me and said that she was a little sad that my brother and I were not raised in the black church. I was a little surprised by this admission, because it came from out of the blue. I let her know that I was glad, actually, that she did not raise us in the black church, or any church.

The black church, as an institution, has been horrific with regard to the GLBT communities in its midst. While checking out Rod McCullom's blog, I saw this post about HIV/Aids in the black community as shown on the CNN special on Black America. Judge Penny Brown Reynolds makes excellent points about the way that the black church has beat down, with a stick of shame, its black gay parishioners. This, in my mind, most anti-Christian approach to HIV/Aids in the black gay male community, both early in the epidemic and currently, should be seen as one of the most shameful developments in the history of the black church, which for centuries was the one place to find succor in a world bent on denigrating black people.

In the 1980s, when one of the most vulnerable parts of the black community started suffering, most of the collective black church seemed either to sit in silence or pass judgment with impunity. Only when black women and children began to be afflicted with HIV/Aids did the black church seem to begin talking about the issue. See, these were the real "victims" of this disease; gay men cannot serve in that capacity within the black church.

Even in the clip I linked to, and as McCullom noted, Roland Martin discussed white gays, black women and black children in his question about the public policy debate surrounding the epidemic. Do you think black gay men crossed his brain? Or Ben Jealous' brain? It was Soledad O'Brien who re-inserted the issue of homosexuality into that discussion. This is all too typical a perspective for the black church (and the black community), and it is a tragedy. The responses to the Civil Rights Movement and the HIV/Aids crisis by the black church were like night and day (as Judge Reynolds suggested), and for those gays and lesbian within the black church right now, I wonder whether they truly feel the love that the church is supposed to provide. Stories like those about DC's own Pastor Rainey Cheeks reminds me that there are pockets within the black church that can indeed provide the support that the black church has been known for providing.

Overall, I am glad that I was not raised within an institution that people I know still have to make excuses for. I am glad that I was not raised within an institution that would have made my struggles with my sexual orientation even more painful than they were. In the end, I concluded that if one wants to have a sense of faith, then that should be something that is mostly private and individualized. Where some see the Bible as the inerrant word of God, I see a rich historical document that has been subjected to levels of reinterpretation that should make the head spin. For so many, organized religion has provided a wonderful sense of purpose. That is great, for them.

Meanwhile, I think my mother did just fine by me.

Summer Thinking on Health Care Reform

I am going to wade into the water of an issue I am still researching, and trying desperately to be as dispassionate about as possible (it will be difficult given my current circumstances), so bear with me.

As was reported at Think Progress, and on the "Rachel Maddow Show," Congressman Anthony Weiner of New York introduced an amendment to the America's Affordable Health Choices Act in the Health Subcommittee that would eliminate Medicare. I thought it was a stroke of genius in the wake of the disparaging comments that have been coming from corners of the right about the horror of the prospect of government run health care. What I have found interesting is the impression that a number of Seniors seem not to be familiar with the fact that Medicare is a government run health care system.

Many on the right have muddled the issues so sufficiently that many Americans are getting confused about this whole issue. Is the goal to reconstruct the American health insurance model? Is the goal to tinker with Medicaid/Medicare to bring more people into it? Is there really a need for a public option and what does that mean? I recognize that the primary goal seems to be health insurance reform with the idea of trying to lower costs sufficiently enough to allow more people to become insured, and that would include, if BHO had his way, a public option for government provided health insurance.

I agree with much of the analysis that Nate Silver provides a Five Thirty Eight; the Dems and Obama are indeed doing a miserable job of selling the product they want us to buy.

During the August recess on the Hill, I think that members who want health care reform need to make one thing quite clear: Medicare is a popular government run health care program. Therefore, when the right tries to attack the notion that such a system cannot work, the Dems will have an answer. They can also add the health care that is received by our military as well. Even Bill Kristol conceded on "The Daily Show" that the government is capable of running a good health care program, when he referenced the military plan.

The Dems also need to be clear about the fact those on the Hill who do not support health care reform, or worse a toothless version of health care reform, are not only satisfied with the status quo, but they also are major recipients of the health care lobby's largess, a lobby desperate to stop this process. David Sirota's latest analyses (here and here) are, I think, particularly informative.

Finally, I think that the Dems need to call out those on the right who are trying to scare the bejesus out of the elderly, which in my mind is a real form of abuse, by saying that BHO and the Dems are out to murder them with health care reform.

But the Dems are going to have to be mindful of an effort by some on the right to disrupt town hall meetings with all of the tools they can muster to frighten the public out of having frank discussions about the need to reform our health care systems.

Personally, I think that it is outrageous that we do not have universal health care in this country. Joan Walsh was onto something when she wrote about some of the reasons why this country did not follow its Western kin in developing a universal health care system. I am all for those who can afford it to purchase top of the line health care policies for themselves and their families. If you have the cash, go for it. But I think it beyond sad that the "have nots" are left to fend for themselves for even basic health care. There should be no need to hunt to find out what public programs might work (buried in the current bureaucracy). Every American who needs health care should be able to get that health care without worrying about going bankrupt for having done so.

I have many friends who disagree with me on this, and I am cool with that. Of course we would have to look at ways to make sure costs were kept under control. I don't mind paying higher taxes to get something like universal health care, and I think I echo the sentiments of the millions of us who currently lack health insurance.

We have many of the planet's smartest people at our disposal who could devise systems that would allow for such benefits for the nation. Why not challenge them on that? We send men and women up into space. Yet, we can't figure out how to guarantee quality health care to the U.S. population? Talk about not reaching for the stars.