What Health Care Reform Doesn't Say

To say that I watched with interest the President's speech to a joint session of Congress last week would be stretching a point (OK, it would be flat out lying). In fact, the only bits of it that I managed to catch were in the process of channel surfing in order to see if it was over yet. 

You see, political speeches are for the most part well choreographed pieces of water ballet. They can be beautiful if viewed from the proper angle. They can even be exhibitions of athletic prowess when performed by professionals (as the President is). They are in the end however, performances that for the most part contain about as much intelligence and importance as a Marx Brother's movie in which Zeppo sings. 

This is no offense to the speechwriters, carefully crafting phrases to stir patriotism, fervor, and zeal among the faithful (and sometimes even among those not so faithful), after running each word and phrase through spin groups of various ages and ethnicity, and just as carefully tracking the results. This is no offense either to the actors/politicians who attempt to bring out the nuances of each written word and every pregnant pause, read them to their audience with the proper reverence, and hopefully manage to play their role in the piece with proper respect and without laughing at the insanity of it all. 

No matter how well crafted the speech however, or skilled the performance; in the end it's never what is said in these speeches that is important, but what is not. For example, in spite of the furor over the Joe Wilson "liar" remark, it was at least stated in the speech that illegals would not be provided care under the latest plan. What was of more importance however was that it was not said that no one was going to check those asking for treatment if they were a citizen (but there's no need to look behind that curtain). Likewise, what no one talked about and no pundits questioned in the later analysis was who wasn't going to be forced to participate under the plan.

• No one for example, asked if the President or the members of Congress, blessed with some of the best medical plans that money can buy, were going to be forced to give up those plans and participate ... they aren't.
• No one asked if an ever-growing number of union government employees at the federal, state, and local levels, who are the fastest growing number of workers in Washington DC (and the fastest growing percentage of union workers in many parts of the country ) were going to give up the health plans carefully negotiated by their union leaders and participate ... they aren't.
• No one even asked if workers at auto manufacturers who had just received government bailouts and have reorganized in such a way that the union workers had received substantial cash and stock to pay for retirement and health plans for current and retired workers were going to give up that money and stock and sign on to this government plan ... they aren't.

So while once more we were presented with a great deal of pomp and circumstance, while we are provided with information that is likely to change faster than the weather, and while we were presented with facts and figures that are subject to more dispute than the basis of many religious conflicts, in the end what we were given a piece of prose that would make the former writers of the episodes of "The West Wing" proud (and be almost as full of carefully crafted fiction). What we were left once again were far too many questions unasked and far too much left unsaid. 

Civic Duty Completed

Update: Concerned that I didn't have a current utility bill, I made sure that I had plenty of valid ID with me when going up to the poling place. I find it interesting (and curious) that a valid passport is not considered proper ID, but a Social Security card or Driver's License with a Social Security number was. 

------------------------------------------------ 

By the time that most of you read this and in spite of my diminished physical condition (yeah I know, mental too...), I expect to have been able to make it a couple of blocks down the road to my local poling place in order to perform my civic duty and vote in the Toledo primary. 

I will not bore you with the choices that I intend to make, as I am a great believer in the sanctity of the secret ballot. Besides, I normally close my eyes in the voting booth to prevent revealing such choices even to myself. (This is more commonly known as the "pin the tail on the jackasses" voting method.) 

Those of you recalling my shady upbringing in Chicago may likewise be surprised to discover that in spite of what might be considered a questionable electoral heritage, I nevertheless pledge to restrict myself to doing so only once. Likewise I vow to restrain myself from the almost overwhelming desire to vote for a Toledo resident now deceased. (I guess you just can't go home again.) 

I urge each of you here in Toledo to likewise perform such duty in a renewed spirit of hope and change. (Excuse me, that last one is making me feel rather ill.)

Random Nonsense

"The loneliest time that I have ever spent was waiting for inspiration." 

This little bit of insight came to me some time ago, and as I once again sit in front of a keyboard with nothing coming out it, I am somehow reminded how difficult it can be to come up with something worth sharing. Since that appears to be beyond my grasp this weekend and in the true spirit of "Just Blowing Smoke", I thought that instead I would share some random and disjointed thoughts with you.

• Is anyone else offended by the president taking the commemoration of the anniversary of 9/11 and co-opting it as a "National Day of Service"?
• Is anyone else amused by the concept that the day after the President announces this first ever "National Day of Service" by the government, that thousands of people have gone to the very seat of power to protest at being "over-served" by that same government?
• Three days before the primary election in Toledo, I wonder how many of those longing for hope and change a little more than a year ago will show up at the polls this Tuesday?
• The Marina District development on the east side of the Maumee River is in trouble once again. The EPA says that there might be toxic chemicals still in the ground there and has told the city to get it (or at least it's paperwork) cleaned up. Meanwhile, Larry Dillin still has not delivered the promised funds to the city for the land (and with this hanging, who would blame him). Eventually this will of all get clear up of course, but my question is: Who is going to want to pay big bucks for a luxury home site or condo on a former toxic waste area to view a river that could also still use a good bit of clean up itself?
• One of our mayoral candidates is touting an economic plan that calls for eliminating the city income tax by increasing property taxes and adding a city sales tax, a plan that supposedly will bring residents and businesses back to Toledo. Now, setting aside that some or all of this may not be possible or even legal, isn't this like putting out a house fire by throwing in Molotov cocktails?
• Speaking of mayors, Toledo Mayor Carlton S. Finkbeiner has 113 days left in office according to my count. Has anyone else started counting down to the celebration?
• Toledo has a recently built baseball stadium and is about to open a new state-of-the-art Arena for hockey, arena football, and music events of every kind. Let us hope that 'Field of Dreams' was right and, "... If you build it, they will come."

OK, now that I've got all of that off my chest, I can go back to the serious business of taking a nap before going to bed this evening Have a great weekend!

9/11

While feeling in no way capable of expressing the sentiments required as we once again remember the events that occurred eight years ago today, I discovered a couple of interesting bits of trivia that I felt might be worth sharing:

• The twin towers of the World Trade Center were actually designed to survive being struck by an airplane, but only one the size of the Boeing 707, which was the largest commercial aircraft in service at the time that the towers were constructed.
• After the destruction of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, the Empire State Building again became the tallest building in New York City.
• The Empire State Building was itself struck by an airplane on July 28, 1945. The plane was a B-25 bomber, which crashed into the 79th floor.

TFP Column: The Space Between

I know that I have been a little lacking in postings this week, but I hope to make it up to you in some part with the column that I have written this week for the Toledo Free Press. 

I apologize for that, but simply couldn't seem to put two coherent thoughts together to do so. (I know, I know, that's never stopped me before.) 

While being a little more esoteric than my normal offerings (look it up, I had to), I think that "The Space Between" may be one of the better ones that I have written for Mr. Miller. 

 With the primaries coming up in just a couple of days however, I feel sure that there is more than a little that you will need to catch up on. I urge you, in spite of the phenomenal weather that we are experiencing, to do so in preparation for that vote.

Coincidence?

The time is fast approaching for President Obama's health care speech to a joint session of Congress. I have no intention of listening to another speech either by the president, or by anyone on health care in this country again this week. 

 As a consequence the search for available options was on. Surfing around my limited cable service, I noticed that one of the alternatives was a movie on American Movie Classics (AMC). It is an old Arnold Schwarzenegger and Gabriel Byrne film from 1999, "The End of Days". I know that the movie played over the holiday weekend on this same channel, but I have to ask: "Could the timing of a showing a movie about the end of the world playing at the same time as the president's speech to Congress be a coincidence?" 

The Hysteric Channel

My convalescence has afforded me far too much time to sample some of the offerings of cable television. While I find that I would actually rather be back at my normal duties, if I have to be spending time at home, I would much rather be doing it reading (and I try to). 

Unfortunately, I tend to fall asleep after a couple of pages and this makes for a rather laborious literary process. As a consequence, I have at least been trying to watch things that are educational (you know, the Discovery channel, the History Channel, and reruns of NCIS). 

I have discovered however, that the History channel is no longer what it used to be. In years past, this offering was often known as the "Hitler Channel", as most of its offerings had to do with the history of World War II and the well documented ravings of the leader of the German people at the time. Today however, it might well be better known as the "Hysteric Channel". 

Acting as an electronic prophet of Armageddon, it seems today that the predominance of their programming is either presenting bizarre interpretations of existing facts (as I write this, there is speculation that aliens might have left us coded messages in the Bible) or predicting the potential end of the world through various planetary disasters as predicted by the Incas, the Mayans, the Aztecs, or the prophecies of Nostradamus. Giant comets or meteors striking the planet, "Son of Krakatoa" or the giant caldera in Yosemite exploding in violent volcanic eruptions, floods, droughts, plagues, and locusts all take their place on the list of things that 'could' or 'might' happen. 

Not to be left out of the propaganda disbursement, we also of course have a smattering of warnings of the potential of either global warming or cooling looming just over the horizon (take your pick, it's still climate change). And if none of those events happen to occur, these guys have covered all the bases, pointing out that in a couple of billion years or so (just a hop and a skip on the galactic calendar) the sun is going to go nova, leaving the earth a burned out cinder. 

Recognizing that these cheery images were not the product of the medication that I am taking, I sought to decipher what meaning might be discovered behind these visions of the Apocalypse on the airwaves. Television from my youth however soon provided a ready answer. 

Aliens have taken control of the History Channel in an effort to scare the living crap out of us (and have a good laugh doing it). 

I came upon this simple solution by taking a page out of an old scifi television show popular before cable existed: "There is nothing wrong with your television set. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling the transmission. If we wish to make it louder, we will bring up the volume. If we wish to make it softer, we will tune it to a whisper. We will control the horizontal. We will control the vertical. We can roll the image, make it flutter. We can change the focus to a soft blur, or sharpen it to crystal clarity. For the next hour, sit quietly and we will control all you see and hear. We repeat, there is nothing wrong with your television set. You are about to participate in a great adventure. You are about to experience the awe and mystery which reaches from the inner mind to the "Outer Limits". 

See, mystery solved! Therefore even if the History Channel is correct and the end is near, we can all take heart from the fact that these same aliens will undoubtedly rescue us in the nick of time. And why, you ask? The answer points to an episode of a competing scifi show from these dark ages of television. I refer of course, to the Twilight Zone episode, "To Serve Man". Have a great Holiday...  

In the spirit of full disclosure, it has likewise come to my attention that CNN, CNBC, and MSNBC might be likewise controlled by aliens. (How else do you explain Keith Olbermann?) To date, I have been able to neither prove, nor disprove this theory. 

A Public Option?

When did we ever get to just try a government program? 

 I have been reading a lot of US History lately, and in none of it can I discover the answer to this question. Oh there have been bad laws passed by Congress that have been repealed, Supreme Court decisions which have been made and later reversed, there was even the 18th Amendment (Prohibition) which was later overturned with the passage of the 21st Amendment. There has never however, been a government program that once begun has not been continued, no matter how much money it cost or how great a failure that it proved. Take for example:

• Federal Income Tax
• Social Security
• Medicare / Medicaid
• The War on Poverty
• The War on Drugs

Federal Income Tax is now costing the government more in enforcement than it brought in during its first year, with a legal code numbering in the ten of thousands of pages. No one likes it, no one (including the IRS) understands it, and no one thinks that it's fair; but we keep it going. Social Security is for all intents and purposes bankrupt. It will not provide the support it was intended to, has been expanded into areas that it was never intended for, and is almost universally hated by those it was intended to aid. As for Medicare and Medicaid, they have simply proved that what the government doesn't know about supporting its poor and aged is only equaled by what they don't know about their medical care, which I guess can be assumed to be alright, since this program is also currently bankrupt.  

As for the War on Drugs and the War on Poverty; not since the War of 1812, where the US lost almost every battle of the war (except for the Battle of New Orleans which was technically fought after the war was officially over) and had the capital captured and burned has such a fight proved so disastrous. Not only did we fail to achieve the objective, but the billions of dollars squandered in the process without achieving any level of victory is almost treasonous when compared to comparably costing military campaigns.

And yet, as we're standing on the threshold of asking the government to take on the entire burden of medical care for the citizens of this country, we seem to expect a different result. Looking back on consistent and overwhelming failure on the part of the federal government in projects of such scope and importance, we seem prepared to try again. Recognizing throughout history that once this road has been started down, we will never be able to turn back, we appear almost eager to begin the journey.  

This proposal is not an experiment. If the federal government once establishes a bureaucracy to take on the burden of national health care, it will never relinquish control of either the money or the power that will come to the petty bureaucrats that assume it. No matter how it fails or what the cost in money, happiness, or human life; we will never be able to stem this tide.

And so I ask that if nothing else, before we allow ourselves to be bullied into yet another government failure, before we place not just our health, but our very lives in the hands of self-serving government officials who will not participate in the very program that they demand that we do, before we allow yet another government travesty to be perpetrated upon us, that we at least realize what we do. Once we commit ourselves to this program, there will be little left to us but the Public Option.

TFP Column: Mayor Needs To Make Way For Class Of 2009

Sometimes giving up the attention that you think you are entitled to is extremely difficult. It happens with an oldest child, and with mayor's who often act like children as well.

That certainly seems to be the case with the inestimable Carlton S Finkbeiner, who can't seem to "Make Way for the Class of 2009", they being the candidates from which one will take office.  Instead of allowing the city to look to a brighter future, our Mayor Carty wants us all to be a part of his non-stop pity party.

If you'd like to turn your invitation to that gathering down, I'm sure that you can find more than enough things to gain your interest by spending just a bit of your weekend with the Toledo Free Press. 

 

Separate But Equal

History has the strangest way of abusing the most innocent of concepts. For example, anyone reading the above listed title from my generation undoubtedly had thoughts of the the racial practices finally ended during the fifties and sixties. At that time, "Separate but Equal" was used for things like facilities that were considered acceptable (even legally) for such things as public restrooms and public schools, even in many cases by those who would not be considered racist. 

Few growing up today would understand that people of any color would accept such practices or that people of different colors sought such a world.

I was not looking at the racial issue in thinking about this concept however. Most of the history that I read these days is more likely to concern the 1760's or the 1860's than the 1960's. As such, Separate but Equal means something entirely different to me.

You see, the 1st Continental Congress, convened in 1774 did so as separate but equal colonies. By the time that the 2nd Continental Congress met in 1775, these colonies were already at war with Great Britain, and when they issued the Declaration of Independence one year later, they did so as "The unanimous Declaration of thirteen united States of America". (Note in the text of this document that the term united is not capitalized, but State is.) 

The Continental Congress gave way to the Congress of Confederation in 1781 and passed the Articles of Confederation, ratified once again by the States. This Congress was finally replaced when the Articles were replaced in 1789 with the United States Congress and the adoption of the Constitution of the United States.

Each of these documents; the Declaration, the Articles, and the Constitution were ratified with the approval not of the citizens, but of the States. Even today, when modification of the Constitution is attempted (more commonly known as an Amendment), such modification is not considered ratified even when gaining a 2/3 majority in both Houses of Congress, but must further be ratified by 3/4 of the States in order to become the law of the land. 

From this, it should be abundantly clear that the Founding Fathers considered the government of those States to be separate from the federal government and equal in responsibility. In fact, the Constitution clearly spells this out in the 10th Amendment stating: "The power not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

Even the design of the Congress can be shown to illustrate this principle. While representation in the House is determined by population, it is equally distributed in the Senate, with each State having 2 Senators. That this equal representation can see to be important is likewise obvious in the longer terms of office and the fact that it is the Senate which: approves treaties, confirms cabinet appointments and federal judges, approves military promotions, and has the power to impeach federal officials. It should also be noted that until the passage of the 17th Amendment in 1911, that Senators were in fact appointed by State legislatures rather than by popular election.

This concept of separate but equal united States changed forever in 1860 however, when some of those States attempted to assert that sovereignty and secede from the Union. This was not the first time that States considered such secession, with many of the New England States considering the possibility twice in the early 1800's. Both the New England States and later those of the South, cited language from the Declaration of Independence to justify such separation, considering that the abuses committed by the federal government at the time were similar to those committed by King George leading up to the original secession from the government of Great Britain. President Lincoln however, considered such secession as an act of insurrection and called up federal troops to put it down. Thus began a Civil War which was to redefine the roles of federal and State governments, a redefinition that we are still attempting to come to grips with today.

And as the federal government today assumes an even larger role in our everyday lives, often replacing freedom with government sponsored limitation, as Statism continues to subvert the role of the States through the extortion of withholding federal funds or outright usurpation of power by assuming control specifically denied it under the 10th Amendment, I have to wonder. As discussion by some States of the principle of secession becomes a topic of discussion by Governors and State Legislatures, it will be interesting indeed to see how this principle of "Separate but Equal" is today interpreted.