"Thinking Out Loud: Feminist Edition"

For the past few months I have been been a recurring guest and sometimes co-host of the show, "Thinking Out Loud, Feminist Edition," on WUML, 91.5 FM, Friday 9:00 AM, produced by Charlotte Crockford in Lowell, MA. 

Charlotte and I quickly became friends after re-meeting several years ago at the 501 Tech Club.  We'd first met at the Lowell Telecommunications Corporation, when I was consulting to them and several other Lowell community based organizations on volunteer management.  Charlotte was managing volunteers at this public access center and learning all she could about media publishing and broadcasting. 

What I admire(d), then and now, about Charlotte is her energy, drive, and desire to mentor to younger people. In her retirement, she works harder now than she probably did during her working years.  Always on the go - to a shoot or interview, training someone on portable, digital camera and sound equipment, looking for people to interview - whatever the task, it's move, move, move.  Charlotte is unstoppable. 

"Thinking Out Loud, the Feminist Edition" is a weekly show and Charlotte has interviewed many notable and not-so-well-known women, including Paula Poundstone, Linda Fife, Paula Fortier, Lorre Fritchy, Jaclyn Friedman, Paula Fortier, Tamara Krenn, Young Sisters for Justice in Philanthropy, Amy Goodman, and Angela Davis.

Just as important as the interviews, though, is the fact that Charlotte is training young women in studio technology and techniques through her show.  She mentors to several young women and has mentored to both men and women over many years.  She's a natural teacher and says she gets some of her energy from being around younger people.  But I'll warn you that she outlasts many of them in a given day, so pack your energy bars if you're going on the road with Charlotte!

Some places to pick up the show include

• on Facebook
• at Spinitron
• on iTunes, although I am having difficulty getting the category for this; I'll update it later

Charlotte and I share a passion for teaching, irreverence for conventional wisdom, and the delight and wonder at all the great technology tools we have today to education, mentor, and just have fun.  Tune in to any of her weekly shows.  On Spinitron, you can select the entire hour or just portions of it, depending on how much time you have at the moment. 

Sit back, relax, and enjoy.

Happy Thanksgiving Day

On this Thanksgiving Day, I'd like to express my thanks for family, friends, a job in this tough economy, a roof over my head, and in general the people who accept me for who I am and not what I have. 

While it's tough to pay the bills because the paycheck always seems just shy of catching up, I have a job and many people don't.  I have a warm apartment and many are homeless.  I have family and many are alone.  These things are very important but we sometimes take them for granted.  For the hundreds of thousands of Americans out there who have no job and/or no home, it's a daily reality.

Life is getting harder and harder for many every day.  People are still getting laid off.  Bank accounts are shrinking for those who have been out of work for months or even a few years.  Temp work is not steady work, even for those with the necessary skills.  Unemployment goes only so far, for those who were fortunate enough to get it and the several extensions they have made.  Some folks who were laid off earlier in the game did not receive any of these extensions.  They've been unemployed the longest and are getting the least help.

Many people who lived and worked quite normal lives, but may have had a mild emotional disorder, were hit hard by layoffs, little unemployment, and tough living situations have become "unglued," so to speak.  Their slightly fragile psyche has lost the mental guards they'd always put in place in public. Now they are lost in the shuffle of struggling to pay rent, always a little bit behind, find work, see if they qualify for any assistance anywhere, and maintain their dignity in the process.  It's a little like always being on stage and having to make wardrobe changes publicly.  They are exposed, emotionally fragile, and quite vulnerable to a host of issues.  A mild emotional disorder grows proportionately to the degree that their public facade slips, and the longer this continues the more difficult it will be to help them build themselves back to normal functioning.  Soon they will be homeless; these are the people who will not survive in a shelter.  Instead, they will become a statistic of the violence and abuse that occurs in some shelters when staff is not vigilant.  [I am not denigrating shelters; many are good.  But tight budgets that are getting cut even more mean shelters will be less able to be as vigilant as they need to be.  Good staff can only do so much and it takes a tough psyche to handle shelter living.]

I realize this Thanksgiving message may sound very dour.  It wasn't meant to be.  Instead, I see the very people I have described above wishing me and other staff a Happy Thanksgiving.   They come in with a smile more often than not.  They search job boards & apartment listings, network with each other, attend networking events to learn of other opportunities, and do whatever they can to get out of the hole they're in.  They are America's latest victims of greed, opportunism, and whatever you want to call the mess we're in.  They are facing it as gracefully as they can.

So what is the good news in all this?  The tenant association I advise collected food to give to our local food bank (Bread of Life in Malden, MA).  The food bank is hosting a complete Thanksgiving Dinner at the high school today and scores of volunteers will be there to assist in peparation and serving.  Some volunteers will be delivering those same meals to shut-ins.  Many other organizations are doing exactly the same, all across America. 

One thing Americans do is help people in need. I'm thankful for that too because it means that when I work with someone who is just getting into this "system" of need, I can point them to resources that help them out.  Two resources in my area to find food pantries and soup kitchens, by the way, are listed below.  It's the same list of sites, but one is calendar-based and the other is a geographic map of locations.  If you are in need and live in my area, check them out.

• http://maldensquare.org/html/calendar.html  (click on Hunger Network on the page)
• http://www.communitywalk.com/hunger_network/map/452893
  

Have a safe holiday folks.  Happy Thanksgiving!

NASA Declares it Finds Water on the Moon

Last month (10/10/09) I posted a brief notice about NASA launching rockets into the Moon in its search for water.  Yesterday (11/13/09), after several weeks of analysis, NASA announced success in finding water.  A number of websites have interesting articles related to this and Google has modified its ever-changing logo to reflect this announcement. 

The revised Google logo will only be there a short time, so check it out now.  Google has also updated its Moon Map.  Mashable has a brief article describing some of the new features, such as panoramic views, scientific charts, and more. 

Other articles on Space.com, CNN Tech, and all the major news outlets have articles, but be sure to go to NASA's website for articles on what this means to the scientific community as well as future space exploration plans.  One other site of interest, and it'll only take a few minutes to view it, is Live Science's page on the Top 10 Amazing Moon Facts.  And if you're an armchair scientist, be sure to read the comments as other readers discuss the science of the facts.  Just remember that many people talk as if they know their facts but that does not make it so.  Don't confuse assertiveness with correct facts.

Personally, I am excited about all this.  Having watched the space program grow from infancy - from looking up in the night sky to see Sputnik after its launch by the Russian space program and waiting for our own space program to develop, to Apollo missions, to today's missions - I eagerly await our next advancements in space.  Go NASA!  (Can you tell I'm off to homecoming today at NU?)

Southwest owed no aplogy to woman kicked off plane

This morning's article about Southwest Airlines' apology to a woman who was taken off the plane because of her 2-year old's screaming irked me. Why should the airline apologize to someone who had no control over her child? The flight crew should have removed her, in my opinion, if the child's screaming outbursts,"Go! Plane! Go!" and "I want Daddy" really did prevent other passengers from hearing the preflight safety announcements.

An airplane is a very different environment and travelers need to demonstrate a certain level of controlled behavior if they want the privilege of traveling by air. Cabin crews (flight attendants and others) are not just glorified waitrons serving a blanket, pillow, or drinks. They are highly trained in safety and emergency procedures. They must make a judgement call regarding any situation that might affect passenger safety and that includes considering someone's preflight behavior and how that might escalate once in flight.

I have two sisters who between them had more than 70 years experience as flight attendants. The many stories they've told over the years about passenger behavior, dangerous situations (one was even highjacked to Cuba in the 60s or 70s), and overall airline regulations and safety make me a firm believer that I do not want to be on a plane with a passenger who cannot control their own behavior or the behavior of the children accompanying them. When I fly, I want to have confidence in the flight crew and the cabin crew. If they are not permitted to exercise some discretion over the risks posed by passenger behaviors, then we are removing from them one of the tools they have to ensure our safety.

But in today's society, it seems everyone wants an apology and they want money to accompany it. The mother in this episode is expecting reimbursement for having to rent a crib for her overnight stay in a hotel. If the mother had control over her child, she would not have been removed the from plane! So why should the airline cover the cost associated with her inability to control her child's behavior?

Watching some reality TV shows today demonstrates a marked shift in people's behaviors from when I grew up. In Parking Wars, we see people who state the city has no right to boot their car after they have xx number of unpaid parking fines and have shown no intent to pay. Then they try to drive off with or remove the boot, which they've just been told is illegal. In one episode, the man managed to drive off and in the process damaged three other cars. In Airline!, we see people berating gate attendants and supervisors or cabin crews over regulations the staff cannot break.

What makes people think this behavior is justified? In some cases, it is just to show off in front of a camera. But so much of it is also just plain ignorant, rude, selfish behavior that people engage in even without a camera present. Stand in any line and watch how people behave when they do not get what they want. Far too many people leave their manners at home when they go out, if they have any manners at all. They swear and scream at the window agent. They threaten. They broadcast their life story and personal business to everyone around them. The hope is that if they get mean and nasty enough, or just plain loud enough, they'll get what they want.

The standard today has become, "Since the best defense is a good offense, I'll be as offensive as I can be and get my way." Where I live, we have a gated entrance so you can only drive in if you have a cardpass or you are permitted in by a resident whom you buzz on an intercome at the gate. But people literally drive through the gate, breaking it, rather than stopping to buzz the resident. Or, they drive up your bumper when you're going through the gate and ride in on your cardpass. Hey, I'm not letting that person in and I don't want to be responsible for their behavior on the property. It's my cardpass they're coming in on. They have no right to do that and, technically, they're trespassing. I live here and they don't. But if I stop and get out and tell them to back up so the gate can come down, the first words out their mouth are, "Get the F---- out of my way, B----!" This is a total stranger and someone who has no right to be on the property until a resident permits them on it. And yet their first words are that.

This antisocial behavior is becoming the norm. And the norm is being channeled down to younger and younger children by parents who don't parent and older siblings and others who don't think about the effect their words and behavior have on children.

Parents who let their children run amuck and get in other people's way say nothing to them, but if you say something to the child, the parent comes screaming at you. "You have no right to say anything to my child! blah blah blah..." Well, if I even knew you were with the child I would have said something to you but you're on your cellphone and paying no attention, so how am I supposed to know you're the parent? You certainly are not in charge of this child's behavior! The old proverb, "It takes a whole village to raise a child," has been lost on entire generations. If you don't want others to make comments to your children about their behavior, then you need to be aware of and manage your child's behavior!

I used to live near a public school and parents who drove their children to school were so obnoxious I vowed never to live near a school again! One day I had to get out of my car and knock on a woman's window to ask her to move her car which was blocking me in my driveway. Her child was already in the school but she wouldn't move until she finished writing out her checks to pay her bills! What made her think that parking in front of my driveway was OK? Why should I be late because she wants to sit and write out checks? Interestingly enough, I now live near two schools, but there is more parking and access available for them so I don't have the same problem.

Earlier in this post I mentioned that flying is a privilege. We have lost sight of the fact that many things are privileges and not rights. Driving is a privelege. Flying is a privilege. Many things are privileges and owners/operators have the right to deny you that privilege if your behavior warrants it. It is not all right to come into my establishment and let your children pick up things off my desk or run around as if it's a playground. It's not all right to bring your child to a restaurant and let them run around and play unless you're at McDonald's and they are playing in a designated play area. Oh, and at the local buffet, it's not all right to make your children -- who are supposed to be accompanied by adult at the buffet table -- be your waiters and keep running up to the buffet to get your meal and dessert. And I see that a lot!

This post is long enough and I think I've made my point(s)! Adults must be responsible for their own selves and for the children with them. If they cannot or will not, then they should be denied these privileges until they grow up and act responsibly. No compensation is due for denying privileges or revoking privileges based on inappropriate behavior!

Digital ‘ants’ take on computer worms

I was amused by the article title, on MSNBC.com this morning, but the title is accurate and an interesting new way to fight computer viruses and hopefully malware as well. (For a definition of malware and how to combat it on your computer, go to my business site, Murray Learning.)

Basically, researchers have "created an army of digital ants and their superior officers, digital sergeants and sentinels, to search out viruses, worms and other malware." Using the structure found in ant colonies and modeling human immune system behaviors, the researchers' small digital army was able to successfully identify threats on several computers the researchers had intentionally infected.

This is a promising new way to address computer threats and relies more on hardware resources than software resources, so the detection process can work constantly yet not interfere with human computing needs.

I hope to see more on this topic in the near future, as the time and money wasted on detecting and removing threats from our computers, as well as the disruption to our normal computing time -- whether it be for work or pleasure -- makes it a high priority in my book.

If you know of other novel approaches to virus and malware threats, respond to this post and let me know. I'll look into it. If it looks promising, I'll blog it.

Grassroots Community Cookout (and snow)

This past Sunday Malden Grassroots held their annual Community Cookout and Social Justice Fair.   Despite the driving rain, and eventually snow!, a good number of people came to eat, take information from the many community organizations' tables, and enjoy the sacred drumming presentation and the youth martial arts demonstration.

Weather did not prevail, as we had a beautiful indoor location for the festivities at the First Parish Church,  Universalist, in Malden.  The warm atmosphere, surrounded by artwork, framed the event nicely.  Three organizations were honored by Malden Grassroots for their commitment to the ideals of community engagement, volunteerism, cultural diversity, human equality, and justice for all. 

Honored were:

• Cyber Cafe @ Malden Square
• Muslim American Cultural and Civic Association
• Youth ACT!

We thank the many people and organizations who braved the weather to join us.  If you missed this event, we hope you'll come next year.  

Malden Grassroots promotes community change from the bottom up. The group hosts monthly activities such as film showings and discussions and provides support for local grassroots campaigns. Each year it sponsors the Grassroots Community Cookout and Justice Fair that brings together hundreds of local residents and organizations to meet and talk about pressing social and economic issues. A racially and culturally diverse organization, Malden Grassroots believes it will take all of us to address such issues as equal rights, housing, healthcare, racism, poverty, and war at a root level.

Email info@maldengrassroots.org for more information.

10th Annual GUT Conference

Friday night and Saturday I spent some quality time with other community organizers, writers, and activists who gathered for a combined Digital Media Conference organized by the Organizers' Collaborative (10th annual conference), National Writers Union, and Open Media Boston.  I often go to conferences on my own dime, so to speak, but always end up bringing back valuable information to use in my work.  This was no exception.

Overall, I was able to gain something important for my work from the conference and that's always a plus.  I consider conferencing successful if it brings me into touch with people who have knowledge or skills I can learn from -- the oh so important networking aspect of conferencing -- and it's a bonus if the sessions provide even more knowledge on topics.  I've gone to so many conferences over the years that many workshop sessions are not all that valuable to me.  But I have to say that the GUT Conference each year has provided important session content as well and this year was no exception.  (Another conference that has done that is PodCamp, but that's another post entirely.)

Combining workshops by writers and media activists brought broader content and additional depth to the workshops, with common threads of organizing/activism and technology.  It seems like a smart thing to do when people have scarce resources and technology is so pervasive in our lives. 

Technology is a real concern to writers as they struggle to earn a living while technology is getting so good at making so much free.  Newspapers, for example, are struggling to redefine themselves in the technology economy and determine what should be free and what should be paid for. Organizations and individuals who want to use the Internet for fundraising or to earn a living need to understand what technology is available to do what, how it works, and how to make it work for them. 

The question of how consumers would pay for information was part of a session I attended on microfunding, where consumers can pay for content on a subscription, per article, or tip basis.   Many web-based content providers want to earn money using the Internet.  Setting up a payment scheme that works for that type of content and gets people to pay can be tricky and may require trying more than method before finding one that works for a person or organization.  Try Delicious' website and type microfunding in the search bar to get an idea of the many options you have for setting up a payment scheme for your website's content.

I have been learning Joomla web development software to convert my websites from a proprietary platform to open source.   But also of concern to me is a good database structure that lets me manage course registrations and payments, memberships and payments, volunteers, and fundraising.  Having a database that works with Joomla, so this is available online and I can manage it from almost anywhere, is important to me.  So I attended the CIVICRM workshop and learned more about it in one hour than I'd learned from research on the Internet I'd done.  That was very valuable to me and can help me make a decision about whether to move in this direction or not after my Joomla sites are running.

Of course, having such a database online raises security issues, so the session on Data Safety, while focused on the Massachusetts law that goes into effect March 1st, seemed a logical session to attend.  I realized during this session that I still have some work to do to comply with the law and now need to absorb more info about it so I can pass this along to others at work.  Thankfully, some tools provided during the session will make compliance much easier. 

Too many conferences focus on workshops and not enough on networking.  Quality sessions are important, but networking can make or break a conference.  There isn't enough networking time built into the GUT Conference in general and this is something I'll bring to the organizers' attention.  I hate having to choose between a session I want to attend and spending some time with people from whom I can learn.  While it seems counterintuitive, I've found that the PodCamp model of 90-minute sessions with 30-minutes in between provide a great balance between the two.  It really works and this is something I'll try to encourage GUT organizers to adopt.  Session facilitators might find it a bit intimidating at first, and some topics can benefit from a Part 1 and Part 2 or a long session, but if you want people to gain as much as possible from their time, you've got to give them time to talk about what they're seeing/hearing and learn from each other.

Overall, I'd give it a good grade and feel it was worth my time.

Wrapping up the Week, 10/10/09

I've not posted much lately because so much has been the same thing over and over, especially on health care.  But this week was a little different and I'll give brief mention to a few items today.

NASA Rockets (in)to the Moon - Literally!

Being on the East Coast was a bonus on Friday, permitting me before heading to work to watch NASA launch twin rockets into the Moon surface in the search for water.  The experiment was designed to capture and analyze the plume of debris from the rocket impacts.  The debris, once ejected from the moon's dark side and exposed to the sun, will begin to break down into its basic components before vaporizing; any water-ice, hydrocarbon, or organic materials will be exposed to NASA's collection instruments.  It will be several weeks before NASA has all the data coordinated from the many sources collecting it and can state whether or not they found water.

If you've never explored NASA's website, here's a chance to do so.  There is a ton of "neat stuff" for all ages.

Health Care Indignities by CIGNA Just Keep on Coming

Cigna is a major health insurer with some major press issues.  Of course, that's not why I'm writing about them.  I'm writing because they do a terrific job of making the case for health care reform! 

Example 1:  Cigna is still experiencing fallout from a protest over the 2007 death of Nataline Sarkisyan who died needing a liver transplant that Cigna deemed too experimental.  After protests in 2007, Cigna reversed its decision, but Sarkisyan died hours later.  In 2008, Sarkisyan's mother and supporters from the California Nurses Association went to Cigna headquarters to confront the CEO and demand an apology.  Angry protestors were heckled by Cigna employees, with one employee literally "flipping off" (giving the "bird" or middle finger) to them.   Sarkisyan's mother left, feeling defeated and stunned by the employees' actions.  She also did not get to meet with CEO Edward Hanway.  Read the article on Huffington Post or this article on Los Angeles Times. 

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/08/cigna-employee-flips-off_n_314189.html

Example 2: Cigna has another battle on its front lawn and this fight is being supported by MoveOn.org and its supporters.  Dawn Smith is trying to fight a treatable brain tumor, but with Cigna as her insurer, it's not a battle with the disease that has Dawn in a fight - it's been a 2-year battle with Cigna which won't even tell her why they won't cover her treatment.  Cigna recently reversed its decision and says it will cover treatment, but they won't tell her why they denied it for 2 years or why it will treat her now.

Cigna only reversed its decision after the public spotlight was thrown on it; does this mean everyone has to go public with their medical conditions to get appropriate treatment?

Health Care Reform is Still a Political Game that Ignores What Americans Want

The above are just 2 examples of why our public health care system needs reform.  The large health insurers are the major voice that seems to get the attention of the Senate Finance Committee.  They continue to ignore the huge numbers of Americans who have signed petitions calling for a "public option" in health  care.  And my previous posts on health care tell that story pretty well. 

Current proposals to include the public option but permit states to opt out show that legislators are not listening; they are playing politics as usual.  They want to be able to say they support the public option and voted for it, so voted for this proposal to get the bill passed.  Others will say they didn't support it but voted for it because it will then be up to each state to adopt or not adopt it.  This is how Congress has its cake and eats it too.

On the Local Front...

Here's something I learned about this week.  Last month, a Massachusetts senior received notice that her October Social Security check was going to reduced by almost $200 (for that month only) and then subsequent checks would be reduced by almost $100.

How many of you can afford to have $200 taken from one month's income, and following that it would be reduced by $100/month?  Now answer that question again knowing that your monthly income was only around $1,100 in the first place!

You probably agree with me that this is a lot of money.  Seniors depend on Social Security for rent, food, medical bills, clothing, and more.  Getting a 10% cut like that hurts.  And getting 20% in one month hurts even more.  The senior was advised to ask Social Security about it, who informed her that MassHealth was taking the money out to cover her Medicare premiums.  Interestingly, the senior had received a letter from MassHealth in August stating that MassHealth was paying her Medicare premiums and that she should not have any money taken out of her Social Security check for it!

A phone call to MassHealth confirmed that the August notice was correct, so the senior brought the caseworker's notes on that call back to Social Security.  The person at Social Security again said they were taking out the Medicare premiums, but the senior argued back, showed her the notes from the previous day's conversation, and insisted that the worker check again.  A little further checking, going farther back into her Social Security computer record, showed that MassHealth was correct and Social Security was wrong.

This senior will get her money back and we hope this is resolved.  But it demonstrates how easily an agency can get something wrong, insist on maintaining what is wrong by not taking a look beyond the initial computer screen, and severely affect someone's life.

For anyone who is having this sort of difficulty, and for the advocates who assist them, documenting every phone call, getting the name of the person you speak with (& confirmation # of calls when they're available), and being politely persistent can make a difference.  We all have the right to question decisions that are made like this.  We also have the right to file an appeal.  Be sure to read notices to determine your rights to appeal and follow those instructions carefully and to the letter.  Meet those deadlines, even if you file a very brief appeal and then follow it up more details later.

Obama Awarded Nobel Peace Prize

People have mixed reactions to the news that the Nobel Committee has selected President Obama as the recipient of the 2009 Nobel Prize for Peace.  I'm pleased.  I think many people have not given Obama the respect he deserves for what he has accomplished and tried to accomplish in his first year in office.  Some talk as if he's been in office several years and cannot seem to get everyone behind his programs.  Some are seriously trying to derail anything he supports.  The Nobel Committee reflected on what he has done and is doing to stimulate peaceful talks and negotiations between and among several world communities and also what he's doing to try to reduce nuclear arms.

The award is recognition of the immediacy with which he tackled these tough world issues and has tried to lead by example in bringing people together to effect change on such important world issues.

Congratulations, Mr. President, and continue this important work.

Physicians Support the Public Option; Why Does the Senate "Gang of Six" Ignore That?

On Huffington Post, a brief report from their Congressional Blog notes that physicians from all specialities and geographically spread support the public option. 

"We asked them [physicians across all 50 states] how much they would support expanding health insurance to the uninsured through a public option similar to Medicare in combination with private options, through private insurance only, or through a public-only system.

Our findings were extraordinary—an overwhelming majority of physicians supported the public option (63%)."

I'll be delivering a notice to my senator today, along with a lemon, to tell him what I think of Sen. Max Baucus' bill that doesn't even carry the support of the 3 Republican members of his committee and is not well supported by the 2 Democrats on his committee. 

Glenn Greenwald on the Populist "Lie"

Glenn Greenwald provides a compelling argument regarding populist leaders who argue for smaller government while actually helping fuel the division between beltway insiders and outsiders so that the power in DC actually never changes hands. Greenwald argues that it's in the hands of the corporations that benefit from government all while the populist radio personalities and others pretend that middle-class Americans are paying for programs that others (lower-income and other disenfranchised groups) benefit from. 

Greenwald purports that the real beneficiaries are the corporations with ties to the beltway.  Read his column,  then come back and tell us  what you think. 

Obama Must Not Back Down on Health Insurance Reform

Each day there are more articles revealing how some Republican leaders in town hall-style meetings are permitting misinformation, myths, and distortions about the health care reform bill to go unchallenged.  They're even furthering the "untruth" by tacking on additional editorial comments to the questioner's statement and taking the false scenarios even farther.

This is an intentional ploy to derail President Obama and is not about health care reform.  And it could work.  They pretend to discuss compromise but have no interest in forward movement.  These leaders are not serving the American public; they are serving a political party that wants its power back. Some of these leaders on the Senate Finance Committee, part of the "Gang of Six."  that is reviewing the bill for areas where they can compromise.  (See my Aug 29th post on this topic.)  

There are many people who have legitimate concerns about the costs and benefits of the reform bill under discussion.  Democratic and Republican leaders are among those with concerns.  This is not a bad thing.  Disagreement can lead to a better bill that serves us better.  Concern, discussion, and disagreement can lead to compromise.  But as I've discussed before, some of the dissenters are not interested in compromise.

These vocal opponents are interested only in derailing Obama's power.  Health care reform is their weapon. 

My message to the President, and to my legislators, is to stop playing "pretend compromise" and focus on what is best for the American public.  The Public Option is vital to true health care reform.  You knew that going in; now refocus and move forward.

The Democratic Party needs to find those Republican legislators who have the guts to vote on conscience, defying Republican leaders who are using this important bill to derail the President.  If there are areas where compromise makes sense without gutting the bill, then compromise.

Democrats and Republicans who have issues with the bill need to discuss those issues without distortion.  And they all need to tell the American public the truth, pointing out what the lies and distortions are when they surface so Americans can be informed and not lied to; the lies of omission must stop.

But overall, they must listen to the American public.  Our voices have been raised, loudly and clearly.  But it seems as if leaders in both parties are not listening.  Their ears are tuned elsewhere.

Tune in to us.

Listen to us.

We're talking to you...

Republican Leader Admits He's "Simply Blocking Health Care"

Health Care Reform news from Huffington Post earlier this week makes me wonder....

"Mike Enzi, one of three Republicans ostensibly negotiating health care reform as part of the Senate's "Gang of Six,*" told a Wyoming town hall crowd that he had no plans to compromise with Democrats and was merely trying to extract concessions."

Enzi is Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) and also serves on the Committee on Finance , the Committee on Budget, and the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.  Senator Edward Kennedy (deceased) was Chair of the Committee.  

Looking at Enzi's Senate page, with a lead article this week on how it is not in the Democrat's best interests to shut out Republicans and moderate Democrats, one would think Enzi is interested in actually working towards compromise.  
"U.S. Sen. Mike Enzi, R-Wyo., today said that if the White House and Democrat leadership in the Senate choose to shut Republicans and moderate Democrats out of the health care debate, their health care plan would fail."

So what part of compromise does Enzi not understand?  Compromise, often defined as mutual concessions, can be a bit more than that.  Compromise can be brought about by reflection/examination of one's initial viewpoint, research on claims by each side, and subsequent adjustment of what one perceived as the barriers to agreement.  It's good compromise if it means one does not give up one's principles in the process.  Just giving in is not compromise, it's giving up.  

The Finance Committee is reviewing health care reform to supposedly see where it can move the bill forward.  That requires some compromise by both sides.  Enzi, however, isn't interested in compromise.

The American public has been voicing its opinion, loudly and clearly, that there are certain points they don't want to compromise on.  Are legislators listening?

A few members of Congress, and a lot of other people, have spent too much time distorting the content of the bill.  Now, powerful members of Congress who know those are distortions don't even bother to correct them.  They prefer that Americans believe the distortions so these legislators can look as if they serve them.  What would serve the American public better than the bare truth on what is in the bill and what is not? 

Give the public some credit.  If legislators' concern is over a cost/benefit analysis, help us destroy the myths and distortions, get the truth out, and then engage in a real conversation with constituents over what they want. 

Oh, and as far as serving the American public, see the paragraph below on the Gang of Six...

* The "Gang of Six" is a group of 3 Republican and 3 Democratic Senators on the Senate Committee on Finance that wants to slow down the process of health care reform in the name of better studying the costs and benefits.  Collectively, the Gang of Six represents about 2.6 percent of the American public, yet are significantly delaying legislation that affects almost all Americans at some point.  See Robert Reich's blog post, Why the Gang of Six is Deciding Health Care for Three Hundred Million of Us.  Members are Senators Max Barkus (D-MO), Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Kent Conrad (D-ND), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Charles Grassley (R-IA and Ranking Member of the Finance Committee),and Olympia Snowe (R-ME). 

Who is Behind Health Care Misinformation?

I don't know whether these folks oppose the health insurance reform bill due to true conscience -- and huge change of heart about government intrusion into our lives -- or if they are playing the same old, "I lost at my turn, so now I'll cheat and make sure you lose at your turn."

Either way, some of the champions behind spreading myth and misinformation are the same people who felt that Congress should step in and take over the life-or-death decision regardng Terry Schaivo about 4 years ago.

From the Huffington Post...
"Some of the same conservative figures taking potshots at Democrats for wanting to fund voluntary discussions about end-of-life decisions between doctors and their patients were leading the charge four years ago to contravene the decision by Schiavo's husband and guardian to remove the feeding tubes from his wife after she had spent 15 years in a vegetative state."

Once again, GOPers want to have it both ways. It's interesting to note, however, that their charges of government intrusion in the health insurance reform bill are actually made up, fictitious, as in not real.

They are getting the headlines, though. And this is confusing the heck out of a lot of people, especially those with limited access to information from both sides of the issue. Who are they people with such limited access to information? Why, in many cases, they're the very people that health insurance reform is supposed to help! They're low-income elderly who don't have cable (yes, America, not everybody in America can afford even basic cable), homeless, non-English speaking, and others who aren't digitally connected to high speed Internet or aren't computer savvy.

Another problem is that sorting out this misinformation takes time. I've spent many hours reading through different viewpoints and actual text of legislation. I've had the privilege of a summer intern who did some basic research for me, bookmarking websites and getting bill #s and references so I can do a more thorough review. Not too many people have that assistance.

Why is the GOP so intent on spreading myth and misinformation? Could it be that they have no valid reasons to fight against health insurance reform? Is this just a GOP tactic to make it difficult for Democrats to push through reform? It isn't a stretch for me to believe that. I just look at some of the other tactics they've taken over the years when it looked as Democrats might win. The "Swift Boat" attacks on John Kerry come to mind.

Health Care Reform: One Argumentt -- Two Sets of Rules

Don't you just hate it when you are trying to understand an issue and someone comes along and starts talking about it -- but they're not really talking about it?  Instead, they're injecting a different topic into the conversation disguised as a position on the original topic?  It's like changing the rules in the middle of a game without telling the opponent.  The purpose, of course, is to derail the original discussion and get people talking about something else and never have to deal with the guts of the original.

The discussion was about health care reform.    Now Republican leaders are attempting to derail the conversation by introducing a senior health care bill of rights.  Republicans supposedly put this forward to ease seniors' concerns over health care "rationing" and cost-cutting under Medicare.  Now I wonder where that idea came from? 

"Under the Democrats' plan, senior citizens will pay a steeper price and will have their treatment options reduced or rationed," according to Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, in an op-ed in Monday's Washington Post (subscription required to view most articles).  This is the same Michael Steele who, in 2006, called for cuts to Medicare to control runaway costs.   How convenient that the GOP has an answer ready to assuage seniors' fears, making a radical shift in position from 3 years ago.  How ironic that this "ready answer" deals with a concern that they created! 

In 2006, Steele felt that the way to reduce Medicare costs was to cut benefits to seniors.  In the current health care reform bill, H.R. 3200, Medicare costs are reduced by reduction of payments to providers.  Everyone seems to complain about runaway health care costs, but when there is a plan on the table to curb those rising costs while maintaining a level of coverage for vulnerable seniors, the Republication option is to derail the conversation. 

And that moves the discussion away from real health care reform.

More Immigrants Than Non-Immigrants are Uninsured

A memorandum by the Center for Immigration Studies finds that more immigrants than non-immigrants are uninsured. This would seem to contradict my post of yesterday that immigration is good for the economy, since providing medical care for uninsured residents tends to drive up medical costs for everyone else.

I'm looking at it a bit differently though. Many businesses that need low-skilled workers rely on immigrants to do these jobs. When there are fewer immigrants, the jobs go unfilled. Sometimes it's because citizens won't take those jobs. Immigrants tend to stick to these jobs to bring money home for the family while Americans will quit and go elsewhere to try to earn more.

But low-paying jobs mean people cannot afford to pay health insurance premiums. Oh, here's an idea! Why not develop a health care system that will provide low-cost premiums for people in low-paying jobs; get insurers to come down a bit in their premiums and partly subsidize the plan so the insured pays what they can afford. It will certainly cost less to subsidize premiums a bit, helping keep people healthy, than to pay the full cost of emergency care for serious illness brought on by lack of access to preventive health care. And this plan gets the insurance providers to share the burden.

Oh, wait -- that's what the current health care reform is all about!

Instead of seeing health care reform as government intrusion, let's look at it as another choice being put into the mix. Along with current insurance options and insurers, there would be an additional option for people who have low-paying jobs or may be long-term unemployed. Let insurers bear part of the burden, the government bear part of the burden, and the individual and company s/he works for bear part of the burden.

Small businesses could opt for a subsidized plan that covers their employees but is affordable for both the business and the individual. Why is that so threatening? Wouldn't it cost less, in the long run, to keep people healthy through preventive health care? Wouldn't business owners rather be able to say, "yes, we're small but we can provide basic health insurance."?

The current health care system has a lot of problems; rising costs -- skyrocketing costs -- among them. We need to work on containing those costs. Let's acknowledge first that among the reasons for those costs are several factors that don't improve health care (rewarding physicians for unnecessary medical procedures comes to mind) and a number of factors that are directly related to good health care or illness (research into diseases and treatments, covering medical costs for the uninsured, unhealthy lifestyles, etc.).

We need a health care system that provides preventive health care for all, shares the cost-burden among all the players as much as possible, provides incentives for good health care, eliminates excesses where they don't improve health care, and reduces costs by helping create a healthier society.

I don't know that any reform plan out there does all that. But I do believe that current reform efforts are a step in the right direction. If we move in the current reform direction, I believe we can help immigrants get health insurance, get better preventive health care, and reverse those numbers derived by the Center. And that would be good medicine in my book.

Word Cloud courtesy of Wordle

Immigration Reform Heats Up

I listened this morning to Power Breakfast from Capitol News Connection, a 2-minute briefing on a hot topic of the coming day on Capitol Hill. This Power Breakfast, by CNC Senior Correspondent Elizabeth Wynne Johnson, focused on two topics , Immigration Reform and Government Transparency. I want to focus on Immigration Reform this morning.

Immigration Reform
Legalization of America's low-skilled illegal workers (undocumented immigrants) could deliver $180B benefit to US households, according to a study released this week by the Cato Institute. The Cato Institute is a "pro-free market, libertarian think tank" in Washington DC, according to this page in wikipedia.

Their study reveals that legalization of these low-skilled workers would benefit the US economy and the immigrants. It would also reduce or eliminate many of the negative elements associated with illegal immigration: smugglers' fees, low productivity, unfilled entry-level jobs, etc.

Tighter restrictions on undocumented workers already in the US would end up costing the US economy. While restrictions may show initial costs savings, these would be offset by lower economic output and fewer job opportunities for skilled workers.

In dollars and cents:
- Tighter restrictions. reducing the number of low-skilled immigrant workers by 28.6, would show a temporary gain of 0.5 percent, or $80B. This figure was reached by projecting a reduction of US household welfare.

- Legalization of low-skilled immigrant workers could show a gain of $180B.

One conclusion from the study:
Reduced Immigration Causes Drops in Investment, Output, and Consumption