Help Me Understand!! Please!

What Next? What are we confronted with in the United States?

2012-02-04T11:48:00.000-08:00

Dear Friends,
This will be short and not sweet. If you took the time to watch the video embedded in my previous post and found that tough to watch, the following video with David Stockman will prove enlightening but not uplifting. David Stockman proposes that we need a Constitutional amendment. How many times have we had people urge a Constitutional amendment, whether for women's right (remember ERA), budget limitations, or now a containment of the 'crony capitalism' Stockman talks about.

Whether you are a liberal, conservative, libertarian, Tea Party or Occupy Wall Street supporter it would be well worth considering how all citizens can get behind any effort to bring justice to this country and stop the crony capitalism to restore fairness in government and what David describes as a true "free market" economy.

Or, should we take our frustration and feeling of powerlessness and bury our head in the sand? We have a choice; do nothing or begin to show our outrage to press for true and systemic change.

Watch this video, please!

David Stockman on Crony Capitalism from BillMoyers.com on Vimeo.

Where do we go from here?

2012-01-16T17:16:00.000-08:00

Dear Friends,

For some time now, I have been saying that I would restart my blog. Today I hope to keep that promise.

Why? Because I believe that ALL Americans need to share their thinking and ideas to make a better country going forward.

Yes! We have a great country. Yes! We are a country with diversity and wonderful richness. We deserve to share in the prosperity and to realize the benefits of a democratic society. Why are we watching people fight over cuts to schools, to health care, to efforts to preserve the environment, to provide alternative energy sources, or police and fire fighting resources in our communities?

I am amazed and startled by the bitter debates and hatred spewing from the mouths of politicians and citizens from time to time. (And yes, I believe I have been guilty of this at times in the past.) While we can disagree on abortion, the size of government, taxes, regulation, immigration, environment or any number of issues, we must come to terms with the failings of our great country.

And I believe we must come together around these same issues to rebuild our nation without dogma, but rather in the context of our shared recognition of where a "united" people have common interests. Suppose, for example, we take the most passionate of these issues: abortion. While we would hope and expect that everyone values life, can we not ask whether there is a way in which we can find a way to reduce the number of abortions while providing for the welfare of young women, children and families. Might there be a starting point to come together?

I know, in my heart, that we are a more loving and caring society than we might believe when we watch the nightly news or read the headlines. I urge all who might read this to find that better quality in themselves and others to work together and understand one another and our country's needs.

What I would ask is that as we work through the electoral process of the months that lie ahead that we demand something better of our potential and current leaders than they are giving. We must be informed and demand that every citizen participate in democracy and share in the prosperity and freedoms of a great nation.

Take a moment to watch the video of Bill Moyers' interview with Paul Pierson & Jacob Hacker, authors of the book, Winner Take All Politics. Reflect on their ideas and what they say without dismissing their work as just another political perspective. Read the book if you dare. But find out what the facts are when we hear the reports of inequality and the erosion of the middle class, etc.

Share your thoughts here after viewing the video or reading this post. You are welcome to express yourself and share. Express your anger if need be, but please don't be abusive of ideas or people. We are not the enemy. We share common needs and desires. Let's find a way to be in the world as a "united" citizenry to help everyone advance and prosper.

Thank you for reading. I hope you will post a thought. I will continue to post mine and move to more substantive and less maudlin posts. Forgive the indulgence in sentiment today. John

Bill Moyers Interviews Paul Pierson & Jacob Hacker: Winner Take All Politics

Jacob Hacker & Paul Pierson on Winner Take All Politics from BillMoyers.com on Vimeo.

Tucson Tragedy and Beyond

2011-01-12T11:05:00.000-08:00

Dear Friends,
Today's NPR home page lists the story: "A Scramble to Control Narrative of Tucson Massacre." The story evokes my sentiments during the last several days. I share them here and hope that they can gain wider discussion and action.
Regardless of the narrative, we, as a country, should feel compelled to answer the question, "What measures might we take to reduce the number of tragedies that find citizens confronted with violence that alters their life, the lives of family members and the community?"
Regardless of who we might want to blame, the need for proactive efforts to reduce or stop the tragedies is essential. Nothing short of this is acceptable.
We can discount the perpetrators and each incident as the work of an unstable person. We can say it is not the result of the rhetoric while not accepting responsibility or recognizing that words have consequences. We can argue for our right to carry arms but cannot deny that people are getting shot, murdered, slaughtered.
Whether it be Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, Judge John M. Roll, 9 year old Christina Taylor Green, Gabe Zimmerman, Dorwin Stoddard, Phyllis Schneck, Dorothy Morris, these murders and attempted slayings are NOT acceptable. It is time to keep the victims of heinous events out front giving renewed purpose to calls for reduced violence in the United States. Going into the history books with growing violence rather than being the model our country calls us to be is unacceptable.

P.S. I could not help but be surprised to see that my less than frequent last post reported on an August story "More Candidates Hunt for Votes with Guns.” The message continues to resonate with me. Whether it be John Lennon some 30 years ago, Virginia Tech, Timothy McVeigh's Omaha, or the gang member on the street the record of violence speaks for itself. Do we simply let the media attention pass within the next week or two, establish a commission to investigate and go back to business as usual? Is that acceptable?

Seeking Compassion

2010-08-23T09:51:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends,
You will find below a post I just made to NPR’s story titled, ‘More Candidates Hunt for Votes with Guns.”

I have found myself trying desperately to pull back from the political rhetoric and posturing that has been going on for some time now. I have tried to avoid sending such notes as follows in an attempt to engage others. Yet, the anguish I feel grows with each day and each report. I have no answers but do have plenty of angst while I attempt to seek what Frances Moore Lappe refers as “entry points” in her books, Getting a Grip and Getting A Grip2.

While I do not advocate marching in the streets. I hope that some of you might share my concern. As we move into yet another electoral season, I hope you will stay in touch with your Congressional leaders and seek opportunities to offer constructive ideas. (No this is not a plea to engage in an exchange with me or others via e-mail, but I certainly welcome any thoughts about constructive ways to move forward – entry points, so to speak.)

I apologize if this finds its way to your inbox as unwelcome. I don’t plan to make it a regular occurrence.

My hopes for a peaceful and happy day!

John

NPR Post 8-23-2010

Dear Friends
This story really continues the incredible and discouraging reports of a country that seems to be in crisis. While some shout, "Take back our country" their behavior with regard to mosques, guns, taxes and so much more seem contradictory to the founding principles of this country as well as the Christian principles of tolerance, love and caring for one another that served to frame my world as I grew up. I continue to be befuddled and seek some sign of sanity and reconciliation with peaceful and thoughtful living to share in the abundance that we United States citizens have so long enjoyed. What can I say? I am saddened by each report and hope the best for our future.
How can anyone read a line like, "She's a conservative Christian and a pretty fair shot" and reconcile it with the teachings of Christ?

Angry Citizens, Health Care Reform & More

2010-03-14T19:08:00.000-07:00

U.S. Citizens have a right to be angry. They also have a right to health care Reform & More….

In this blog posting I want to make a few points. They are:

• U.S. Citizens have more than enough reason to be angry.

• We need health care reform. NO news here if you are a believer. But do any of us know the facts?

• A mandate to include everyone makes sense if we want to provide health care to everyone in a society where economic disparities are creating hardships. Do we care about and can we care for every citizen? I think so, but it is an uneasy answer if we don’t get in touch with the deficit spending.

• Reconciliation means we live by a majority rule, rather than a minority bullying and distorting the realities of our challenges as citizens and a country.

• And finally, there is much more that must be addressed than health care. We must take back our government with civility, honest disagreements, dialogue and the expectation that those elected serve us – you, me and the family next door.

1. Plenty of reason to be angry.

Let’s start with the most obvious – citizen outrage and anger. CBS Sunday Morning’s annual Money edition said it all when they reported the following and stated that the “average worker is getting fleeced.” Check out this excerpt from the show and follow the link to read or hear the entire segment.

February 28, 2010
The Great American Paycheck Squeeze
Over Last Two Decades, as U.S. Workers Became More Productive, a Third of All Income Growth Went to Top .01%

"In a Great Recession, you don't have songs that say, 'Take this job and shove it!'" Mishel said.

He points to the fact that from the 1940s until around 1970, as workers became more productive, their salaries grew accordingly. But around 1970, things changed, and for the next four decades, as productivity skyrocketed 70%, hourly wages hardly budged, rising a mere four percent.

So, where did all that extra money go? Mishel points to the very top.

"Between 1989 and 2007, before the Great Recession, of all the income growth that was generated, the bottom 90 percent [of Americans] got only 15 percent of it. The upper one percent got 55 percent. And the upper tenth of the upper one percent, the one out of 1,000 households, got about a third of all the income growth."

"Hang on, hang on - over 18 years, a third of all income growth went to one tenth of one percent?" Axelrod asked.

"Absolutely," Misehal said.

In other words, the middle class was getting a raw deal.

"We know that CEOs in large companies make 270 times that of a typical worker," Mishel said. "It used to be around 20 times, 30 times, back in the '60s and '70s.

"Now the fact is, you don't have to pay someone that much to get out of bed and go to work and be productive."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/02/28/sunday/main6252373.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody

Add the reports of sex scandals, fraud, misappropriation of taxpayer funds, a Supreme Court ruling that money is a form of free speech, bailouts that save us from the brink while Wall Street and Banks continue bonuses and fight reform, etc and we have PLENTY to be angry about. Yet, I think the Coffee Party is on to something that I believe is needed. Here are a few quotes from a recent NPR News story:

Coffee Party Founder Wants Common Grounds

"Let's get together and drink cappuccino and have real political dialogue with substance and compassion."

She says that the Coffee Party is a way for people to practice democracy. "During campaigns, there are clear ways to participate. But when you're not in the middle of a campaign, it's very hard to figure out how to engage in a political process in an ongoing way, that's effective and constructive. So we're trying to create opportunities for that kind of effective, ongoing engagement." Despite the reactionist origins of her group, Park says the Coffee Party doesn't want to be seen as the anti-Tea Party. Learn more at the link below:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124648089&ps=cprs

2. What’s in the Health Care Reform legislation?

The March AARP Bulletin asks: “What happened to sour a majority of people on reform in the 14 months between November 2008, when Barack Obama won the White House with an apparent mandate to overhaul the dysfunctional health care system, and January 2010…?” That same issue demonstrated that when you look at the polls raising questions about many specific ideas, in the many versions of the legislation, majorities still support these measures.

Yet emotions, rhetoric, misinformation and tremendous sums of money spent by lobbyists plus the wheeling and dealing among Congressional members have just about destroyed chances of reform. We cannot let that happen. Yet, these very failings must be the next agenda that we citizens work to change. I am reminded that President Obama said in his inaugural address and on many occasions since, “I cannot do it alone. I need everyone to help.” Some have chosen with great intent to not help and to be obstructionist. No doubt they see efforts to stop this President to be far more beneficial to them than working collaboratively to help the country. But that is my opinion, of course.

Here is the question I asked myself recently. “Have you, John, read the actual proposed legislation and tried to determine what the implications are for the country, individuals and companies? Or, have you, John, read and listened to what the pundits and news sources report – trusted sources or not?” Substitute your name in this question for “John.” What’s the answer?

So, here is a start, a link to the White House page on the Health Care legislation. It provides summaries and the complete legislative proposal. Just scroll down the page to find links. Don’t trust the White House? I’ll add links to the two houses of Congress.

Here’s the White House link: http://www.whitehouse.gov/health-care-meeting/proposal.

Here are the Congressional links:

Here’s the House of Representative Link for Health Care legislation: http://search.house.gov/htbin/search.

Here’s the House of Representatives’ Home Page: http://www.house.gov/.

Here’s the Senate Link for Health Care Legislation: http://www.senate.gov/general/search/search_cfm.cfm?q=Health+Reform+Legislation&x=11&y=11&site=default_collection&num=10&filter=0.

Here’s the Senate Home Page link: http://www.senate.gov/index.htm.

3. Why Mandates?

It is pretty clear that for health care reform to work effectively with everyone covered we all have to share and participate. This is not different from Social Security and Medicare.

Ah! You say, but look at these two programs. They are going to break the bank. Well, I encourage everyone to listen to or read the transcript from Terry Gross’ Fresh Air interview of March 9, 2010 with David M. Walker, the former comptroller general of the United States. He does point out that the fastest growing portions of the U.S. budget are the mandatory spending requirements. Yet, he also points out that the Social Security revenues had for years been in excess of the payouts. Where did the surpluses go? He points out that Congress and Presidents used those surpluses to pay for other general discretionary spending. Plus, he makes the obvious connection to our penchant for riding the wave of politicians and their anti-tax rhetoric. Guess what folks? Someone has to pay for the health care, education, and transportation systems we all want if we are going to be a free, healthy and competitive global economy. On the other hand, Mr. Walker presents a pretty scary scenario. Perhaps we should all listen closely to his interview and read his book. Then we might want to try less hysterics and more dialogue for problem solving – by both parties.

Here’s the link to the NPR interview with Terry Gross on Fresh Air, March 9, 2010:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124460237.

I’d like to offer one final note on this topic. If I am not mistaken, two wars, Iraq and Afghanistan, have resulted in “discretionary” spending based on an argument of Weapons of Mass Destruction and spreading democracy. How has our return on that investment worked out? Of course, there will be plenty of you who do not view these wars as discretionary. Whether you do or not, the question posed is worth some reflection. “How has our return on that investment worked out?” Might that money have been used to pay for education, health care, or an improved business climate?

4. Reconciliation is Majority Rule, not minority Bullying.

I am so there when it comes to the ideas of dialogue and working to seek common ground offered by Annabel Park, founder of the latest move to bring people together, the Coffee Party. At the same time I am not willing to let one party stand by Nancy Reagan’s “Just Say No” slogan when we need to work together. That approach did not work with drugs and it won’t work when the country confronts the incredible challenges staring us in the eye.

So, let’s take a minute to revisit reconciliation in the past. Here’s a quote from the March 7, 2010 NY Times article: Reconciling With the Past. Check out the entire article by connecting with the link below. Thomas E.Mann, Norman J. Ornstein, Raffaela Wakeman and Flogelson-Lubliner offer the following observation: “The history is clear: While the use of reconciliation in this case—amending a bill that has already passed the Senate via cloture—is new, it is compatible with the law, Senate rules and the framers’ intent.”

Here’s the link to learn more about past legislation impacted by reconciliation:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/07/opinion/07mann.html?scp=1&sq=Reconciling+with+the+Past&st=nyt.

5. Moving beyond health care. Let’s build a United States.

We need a Congress that serves the people, not lobbyists or special interests, but the citizens of this country. Moreover, it is this writer’s belief that we must begin to demand that they serve us with a sense of morality that is fair and equal, speaks to economic and social justice, and levels the playing field so all citizens can participate in and be contributing members to solve the country’s biggest challenges. We can do better.

We must stop the political rhetoric and DEMAND that leaders lead. At this point in time we have leaders in name only who are, in my opinion, acting like children and demonstrating no ability to serve a common or higher good. Our country is in deep distress and this cannot continue if we expect to be globally competitive, environmentally friendly, and a society that cares for all its citizens.

We, the citizens of this country must move beyond the fear mongering and come together around a vision that unites us, pulls us all up by our bootstraps and celebrates the value and contribution every living soul makes to the well-being of this country and its citizens.
Time is running out. This is urgent. Either we come together around the common good or find ourselves torn apart by the insanity of failed leaders and citizens driven by media sound bits.

Part V - Hope, Health Care & Civility

2009-10-18T10:43:00.000-07:00

Part V - Hope, Health Care & Civility

The Citizens’ Role and Government: For me, the idea of taxation is premised on the notion that we each have an obligation to give back, to help our neighbors and to build our communities and nation. I listened to Robert Reich report on Bill Moyers’ Journal (June 12, 2009) that as late at the “1980s the top one percent by income in this United States had about nine percent of total national income. He went on to say that in “2007 that to one percent was taking home 21 percent of total national income.”

Where is our sense of responsibility to give back, to want to do right by our brothers, sisters, neighbors who have not been as fortunate? Why do alarmists immediately raise the topic of class warfare when the discussion moves to raising taxes on those who can afford it? We have not heard that proposition when the income levels shifted from the lower class to the upper class. What’s up with that?

Take a moment to reflect on the following from David Broncaccio’s PBS show, NOW.

“According to recent studies, the top one percent — the wealthiest among us — are getting richer and richer. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OCED) has found the United States to be the most unequal society of all industrialized nations.” http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/executive2.html

Help me understand. Why are average citizens taking up the anti-tax cry when the more well off citizens are reaping the gains? Why do we feel it is wrong for those who can pay more to do so for health care reform? I ask everyone to revisit the matter of taxation. I believe that contributing to a health care system that serves all citizens is not only a moral issue but simply good economic policy. I believe the returns on such an investment far outweigh the expense.

My assumption that this health care reform will better serve all may not prove to be the case. I am willing to take the risk. I believe the investment in health care reform, however imperfect, will yield far greater benefits for the citizens than the Wall Street bailouts (with troubled/legacy assets still on the books) or GM and Chrysler’s resurrection from the dead. Help me understand. Why would I leave the citizens of this country by the roadside after refueling the auto industry and financing financiers of this country with CEOs continuing to be excessively compensated without measurable performance based pay packages? Where is the equity? (Check out Gretchen Morgansen’s August 15, 2009 column: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/business/16gret.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=Gretchen%20Morgansen&st=cse)

Finding Our Voice:

I believe we must do better. Help me understand. How can people in a free nation begin to work together to help one another? Can we make a start by finding a way to heal and reconcile? Can we find a way to serve our common good with health care reform? Can we – the citizens - find the means to take the argument from the hands of commentators, special interests and politicians? Can we – the citizens – find a way to show leadership when voices in positions of leadership fail us?

Help me understand. Why are the leaders in Congress struggling to move forward with legislation to provide quality health care to all citizens? How do we citizens raise our voice to demand that hard working Americans deserve the same lifetime health care Congress receives?

Part IV - Hope, Health Care, & Civility

2009-10-16T11:51:00.000-07:00

Part IV - Hope, Health Care, & Civility

Health Care Costs and Deficits: There are those who honestly offer the observation that the country cannot afford the cost of health care reform. On October 7^,2009 the Congressional Budget Office reported that the health care reform would reduce the deficit by some $81 billion over the next decade. Regardless of our position, we need to understand what data tell us while distinguishing conjecture as partisan arguments. As we look to the future, we may not have solid data regarding costs. On the other hand, if we look to the past we can see what the current health care system costs while not providing fair and equitable coverage.

Where were the voices of those concerned with deficits when Republicans and Democrats took us into a war with sparse evidence of weapons of mass destruction? These same elected officials then moved on to other manufactured policies to justify a war costing nearly a trillion dollars, combining both Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Congress did not provide due diligence when they took us into a war. However, some want to use the deficit argument to stop the initiative to provide universal health care for all citizens. Why is health care blocked by such arguments when war was so readily embraced? Has our health improved since going to war? Have we achieved other benefits to compensate for the dollars that might have been spent to provide health care? http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home or http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/13/hidden.war.costs/

Higher Taxes: The cost argument quickly brings to mind the tax argument. I must confess that the tax argument is where I need the greatest help in my understanding. I don’t seek to burden anyone, myself included, with imprudent or unnecessary taxes. I do, however, believe that those in a position to do so should contribute to a government system that seeks to raise everyone in the boat by providing fair and equitable health care, education, and social services. Current proposals call for elimination of the Medicare Advantage Programs that have benefited me. It may call for a sacrifice. Yet, the costs of this program are reported to have gone well beyond the original intent. What sacrifice are we each willing to make to assure that everyone has quality health care?

Part III - Hope, Health Care & Civility, October 15, 2009

2009-10-15T11:24:00.000-07:00

Part III - Hope, Health Care & Civility, October 15, 2009

Lobbyist and Special Interests: Help me understand how we can harness the energy of Congress to better serve the well being of all citizens. How might we exert some influence to move them to abandon such horrible and unreasoned debate? What will it take for citizens’ voices to be heard over those of special interests when Senator Max Baucus, Democratic Chair of the Finance Committee, leads the conversation and is reported to be the number 1 Democratic recipient of campaign funds from the insurance industry? http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=2010&cid=N00004643

Bill Moyers (10/9/09) reports that Senator Max Baucus received over 1.5 million dollars from the industry in recent months when they spent over 380 million dollars on lobbying, advertising and political contributions. Moyers went on to note that the current Finance Committee members received 50 million dollars from health care lobbyist in the past two decades. How might we citizens stand up to this money and get our voice heard above the sound of political cash registers ringing up vast sums?

We need not raise the question of political malfeasance in the context of the Congressional arm of government alone. How well are we being served by many of President Obama’s appointees who have storied histories of wide ranging personal and financial interests and work in the health care and insurance industry? What do we make of the NY Times recent front page report of Tom Daschle’s role in efforts to bring about health care reform? http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/23/health/policy/23daschle.html?_r=1&scp=4&sq=Tom%20Daschle%20&%20health%20care&st=cse

Hope, Health Care & Civility

2009-10-14T19:40:00.000-07:00

Hope, Health Care and Civility

John D. Cooper

The election of President Barack Obama gave me great hope. I was proud of our country and filled with expectations that the citizens of the United States were prepared to move forward with a more civil dialogue to renew the country. I still passionately embrace these idealistic hopes. I seek common ground for the common good. Of course, I can make no assumption that everyone else wants to get to a place where we can have dialogue or serve the common good. Nor can I suggest that I have mastered the art of civil dialogue. I aspire to do so.

Yet, I have come to recognize in ten fleeting months that we have much to learn, many roads to travel, and many wounds to heal. It should have been apparent that with 48% voting for the other candidate(s) after a campaign filled with mean spirited rhetoric, lies and distortions we faced an uphill climb. I, and many of my jubilant friends, would have been despondent should the election have gone in the other direction by 5 or 7%. However, nothing could have prepared me for what has followed.

It is startling to think that the current President has been portrayed as Hitler. Yet, I am reminded that such characterizations were offered during the past 8 years of the Bush administration.

I am profoundly pained by what I see, read, and hear each day. My deep sadness is rooted in an unwavering belief that the people of the United States are better than the picture painted in the media.

I listen and read in disbelief when:

§ Hearing a commentator say President Obama is "a guy who has a deep-seated hatred for white people or the white culture. I don't know what it is..." Glenn Beck, July 28, 2009

§ Sarah Palin speaks of “death panels” and Senator Grassley plays upon those fears in his comments while being identified as an honest broker in the Senate.

§ Arizona’s Representative Trent Franks states that President Obama is “an enemy of humanity” and demands he provide his birth certificate.

I write to ask those reading this to help me understand. How might we get beyond this acrimony? Why are we indulging outrageous ranting rather than reasoned conversation to resolve the health care problems for reform to serve all citizens? What follows are my personal observations in an effort to pose some questions for reflection.

Part II - Hope, Health Care & Civility October 14, 2009

2009-10-14T18:59:00.000-07:00

Part II - Hope, Health Care & Civility - October 14, 2009

On a recent trip to Bermuda a taxi driver recounted how he had shared his personal experience with a U.S. traveler about receiving quality health care while abroad. The traveler simply could not imagine that there were nations that provided better health care than that found in the U.S. A. Yet, a World Health Organization report indicates that the United States is 37^th in health care performance. And journalist TR Reid reports on health care around the world in Sick Around the World, A PBS Frontline Special based on his book Healing America that other countries provide health care without sending people into bankruptcy. In the US it is reported that 50% of bankruptcies are the result of health care debts.

We seem hard-pressed to believe that other countries can and do provide health care better than that found in the U S of A. Yet, medical tourism is expected to grow to over 1,000, 000 by 2010 in the United States. And the Medical Tourism Association International Headquarters is located in West Palm Beach Florida with a “goal of promoting the highest level of healthcare to patients in a global environment.”

Let me start with one of the hottest of the hot buttons in these proposals – the Public Option and Free Markets. Those who oppose this seem adamant that government stay out of the health care business and leave it to the private sector. So I ask why citizens –hard working Americans-- would object to a public option when reports like the PBS Frontline Show “Sick Around the World” or Bill Moyers’ Journal inform us of denials after a diagnosis and other practices that contribute to health care representing 50% of bankruptcies in the United States. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sickaroundtheworld/.

Help me understand the screams that the proposed legislation will usher in socialism and drain the free world (the U.S.) of free markets. Can we really look at the private sector’s performance to date and feel good about their record at providing all citizens with quality health care in a fair and equitable manner? Why is it that the private sector should continue without a public option in the face of reports of denials of health care claims and the practice of dropping the insured when they get sick? Should we leave our health care exclusively to the private sector in the belief they know best or can provide better than government?

We have been willing to bail out corporate America on more than one occasion in recent history. AIG, Lehman Brothers, Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Citigroup, Inc represent some of our most recent initiatives to provide a generous helping hand to corporate America.

How many Americans can recall retirement pensions from United Airlines being handed off to the government in 2005? Remember the Worldcom and Enron scandals during the past decade? These events and the recent market decline from 14,000 to 7,500 gave rise to retirement plans drastically pared back due to fraudulent, incompetent business practices, or failed leadership?

I do not argue for socialism, nor do I suggest that we should throw capitalism and free market thinking out. I ask for a balanced approach to serve all citizens. What is wrong with trying to bring everyone in the boat up? Doesn’t it seem reasonable to provide a public option in view of the history of private sector shortcomings that have not served people well on more than one occasion?