The Compromise that Satisfies no one?

 

The issue is presented to the public as complex and divisive, with differing opinions on the various nuances threatening to undermine the whole process. I am of course speaking of healthcare reform. Odds are, five years from now you won’t have the same coverage you have (or don’t have) now. Congress, under pressure from President Obama, is gearing up to reform U.S. healthcare in a big way. The previous Democratic administration also attempted this, namely through then-first-lady Hillary Clinton. But the situation today is far different than that of 1993. This time the important players — doctors, insurance companies, pharmaceutical manufacturers — seem to be on board.

Why is this such a big issue? As the years chug forward, fewer and fewer Americans have health insurance, and therefore cannot afford good medical care. Nearly 46 million Americans have no insurance, and 25 million more are underinsured. One major reason for this crisis is that many employers have stopped offering insurance to employees because of the high cost. In the United States, total health care spending was $2.4 trillion in 2007 — or $7,900 per person — according to an analysis published in the journal Health Affairs. The United States spends 52 percent more per person than the next most costly nation, Norway, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation.  Yes, you read that correctly. The U.S. spends half-again what the so-called ”expensive, socialized” Scandinavian countries spend!

There’s little debate that health care reform is necessary — President Obama, Republican and Democratic members of Congress, the American Medical Association and America’s Health Insurance Plans, which represents the insurance industry, all have agreed the system needs to be changed, although they disagree on how to do it:

On the Left: Single-Payer

Single-Payer, the solution that exists in much of Northern Europe and was attempted by Hillary in 1993, is the sort of fundamental reform desired by many Americans, including healthcare groups like Nurse’s Unions. This solution would eliminate private insurance companies, replacing them with a government-sponsored plan. This plan would collect premiums from individuals, and pay for care at any medical facility. Essentially this plan brings together the best of socialism and capitalism – the goverment manages the financial aspect of healthcare, while private providers – doctors, hospitals, etc – remain independent in providing care. Other perks of single-payer include, well, a single-purchaser: one who can lobby for lower prescription drug prices. Most importantly, single-payer eliminates the administrative/bureacratic costs associated with multiple insurance companies and myriad plans – a significant proportion of current medical costs.

On the Right:  Tax Breaks

House Republicans have proposed individual tax breaks for buying health insurance and “pools” of states and small business to get lower-cost health care plans. They also proposed increasing incentives for people to build health savings accounts, allowing dependent children to stay on parents’ policies until age 25 and encouraging employers to reward employees for improved health.

Obama’s Compromise: A Government Plan and Incentives

A central point of the president’s plan is to create a government-sponsored health insurance program alongside private plans that would be an option for all Americans, similar to how Medicare is now an option for Americans over age 65. He has also said he’d “like to see” prohibitions against insurers discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions, and incentives for people to use preventive services and wellness plans. Obama said he’s already identified “hundreds of billions of dollars” worth of savings in the federal budget that could help finance health care reform, such as rooting out waste, fraud and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid. He’s also proposed reducing tax deductions for high-income Americans. If you receive high-quality health insurance from your employer, Obama said, his plan won’t change that, and you can still keep your insurance and your doctors.

Responses:

In particular, Republicans don’t like the idea of having a government-sponsored health insurance program for all Americans. They fear employers would opt for the government-run insurance over private insurance because the government option would most likely be less expensive, but Republicans say it would also be lower quality.  Republicans say that if Obama gets his way, there’s a good chance your employer will stop buying the private insurance you have now and instead opt for the less-expensive government plan.

While many Democratic lawmakers believe in the President’s plan, many on the left advocating single-payer feel betrayed that the main driver of high costs – the myriad of private plans and companies – is being left in place. They believe, that this compromise will do little to nothing to ease costs, and that without cost reduction, the public plan proposed by Obama will not be able to pay for itself, stifling attempts to balance the deficit.

In the end, neither side gets what they want. Is this turning into the compromise that satisfies no one and improves little?

German Fox steals over 100 Shoes

 

Okay, time for a break from serious stuff. This was too adorable for me not to post:

A serial shoe thief in the small German town of Föhren was revealed last week after more than 100 shoes were stolen over a one year period. What surprised everyone is that the thief is not a human being; it’s a fox. Residents were baffled after more than 100 shoes kept outside their front doors overnight went missing. The mystery was finally solved this week after forest worker Rolf Willerscheidt discovered the hoard of shoes close to the fox’s den.

It is believed that the shoes stolen by a female fox were used as toys for her cubs because some lost shoes found have small bite marks. A local police spokesman said: “There was everything from ladies’ shoes to trainers. We’ve found between 110 and 120 so far. There are little bite marks on the laces, it seems a vixen stole them for her cubs to play with.”

However, most of the shoes remain in good condition, though many have missing laces. Meanwhile, the culprit remains at large and no reprisals are planned against her, though some townsfolk have begun keeping their shoes inside overnight.

 

Prop 8: Looking Forward

Yesterday the California Supreme Court voted to uphold Proposition 8 – at least in name. In a 6-1 vote, the Court held that it was constitutional for the State of California to limit ‘marriage’ to between a man and a woman – but that’s it. In the 135 page decision, the Court also held that the State could not withhold any of the tangible aspects of marriage from same-sex couples, only the title. This seems to imply that civil unions have been legalized in California, with some commentators speculating that this may lead the State to get out of the marriage game altogether. The Court also held that the 18,000 marriages that took place during the period between the repeal of the original ban and Proposition 8 were valid and would remain so. Protests, of course, ensued.

This effectively creates three classes of people: heterosexuals who can freely marry, unmarried homosexuals who cannot, and the current  married homosexuals. If this last group were to get divorced, they could not remarry. This triple caste system is clearly unconstitutional at the federal level, via the equal protections clause of the 14th amendment. This is where things get interesting: the two former opposing lawyers in the 2000 Bush v. Gore case, Ted Olson and David Boies, are teaming up to bring a federal case on just these grounds. But is this a good thing, with the current state of the Supreme Court? Many gay rights groups have for years dreaded a premature loss at the federal level, and have warned against such cases in the past.

This ties in nicely with the story of the new Supreme Court nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, picked to replace retiring Justice David Souter. Even with her appointment, the Court is still roughly balanced between left and right (she is replacing one of the more liberal justices). If a case were to come before the Court, it would likely have support from Justices Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg, and Sotomayor, and would likely experience opposition from Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito, Scalia, and Thomas. That leaves the decision up to moderate Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is often termed a ‘conservative who occasionally votes with the liberals”. Kennedy’s record on civil rights issues is mixed but generally good - he opposes affirmative action but supports a broad reading of the ‘liberty’ protected by the Due Process clause of the 14th amendment.

With regard to gay rights, Kennedy has often taken a strong stance in favor of expanding Constitutional rights to cover sexual orientation. He wrote the Court’s opinion in the controversial 1996 case, Romer v. Evans,  invalidating a provision in the Colorado Constitution denying homosexuals the right to bring local discrimination claims. In 2003, he authored the Court’s opinion Lawrence v. Texas, which invalidated criminal prohibitions against homosexual sodomy under the Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution, overturning the Court’s previous contrary ruling in 1986’s Bowers v. Hardwick. In doing so, however, he was very careful to limit the extent of the opinion, declaring that the case did not involve whether the government must give formal recognition to any relationship that homosexual persons seek to enter. In both cases, he sided with the more liberal members of the Court. Lawrence also controversially referred to foreign laws, specifically ones enacted by the Parliament of the United Kingdom and the European Court of Human Rights, in justifying its result.

Time will only tell.

“Glee” Shines in Pre-season Preview

FOX’s new one-hour musical comedy “Glee” premiered tonight, the story of spanish teacher Will Schuester as he attempts to return the less-than-spectacular remnants of the McKinley High School glee club to its former glory – a glory in which he once took part.

Cast includes Matthew Morrison as Will, Jayma Mays as germaphobic  fellow teacher Emma Pillsbury, Chris Colfer as the fashionista soprano Kurt, Amber Riley as the diva Mercedes, Kevin McHale as the handycapable guitarist Arty, Jenna Ushkowitz as the awkward punky Tina, Lea Michele as the powerhouse lead female Rachel, and Cory Montheith as the cliche reluctant yet talented football player Finn.  Jane Lynch also stars as the hardcore cheerleading coach Sue Sylvester – who’s out to undermine the whole endeavor in the name of preserving the caste system and securing her team’s place in the national spotlight.

With smashing performances of Amy Winehouse’s “Rehab” and Journey’s “Don’t Stop Believing”, the first episode swept this blogger off his feet. Unfortunately, FOX has decided that this episode will be a mere teaser, with regular episodes returning in the Fall.

Maine Joins the Club, is NH next?

Sorry for the month-long delay in posting, I graduated this month.

Last week the state of Maine, through legislative action,  joined Massachusetts, Connecticut, Vermont, and Iowa in the legalization of same-sex marriage.  Among the New England states this leaves out only New Hampshire from offering marriage equality to all citizens – and this may be changing. The New Hampshire legislature has passed (Senate: 13-11, House: 178-167) a bill legalizing same-sex marriage, and the bill is heading to the desk of Governor Jon Lynch for signature, veto, or passive allowance. It is not known what action Lynch, a former gay marriage opponent, will take. If he signs the bill or passively allows its passage, New Enlgand will become a solid block with regard to marriage equality. The New York legislature has also begun preliminary work on similar legislation.

Texas Steps Backward on Science Standards

This week the Texas State Board of Education voted to place a fudgy ’strengths and weaknesses’-like wording into the state science standards, using the language “all sides of scientific evidence”. This sort of wording allows for the introduction of all sorts of textbook wording that supports creationist-inspired tearing down of Evolution. Just look at the way the members of the Texas board treated Mrs. Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education:

Texas is considered a critical battleground state, as its status as an ‘adoption’ state with regard to textbooks makes it the largest textbook purchaser in the nation, which significantly influences the quality of textbooks produced nationwide.

Learn more at the National Center for Science Education’s website.

Candy Corn in SPACE!!!!

When Astronauts are working on the International space station, they are allowed to bring up ‘crew preference’ items. NASA Astronaut Don Pettit used his available space to bring up supplies for cool microgravity science experiments! And - lucky for us – he filmed them all! Below is one of his vidoes that was recently featured on NPR’s Talk of the Nation: Science Friday.

He also took some amazing time lapse recordings of the planet from space:

More at the Sci Fri website.

Quiznos Ad – too hot for Television?

So I’m watching the tiny bit of television that I do, and I see this ad for a new sandwich at Quiznos subs. Is it just me, or is this incredibly dirty?

Notice how “Scott” looks down when he says ‘I got burned’ – what is he looking at?!?!?!

This is surely the queerest sandwich ad ever. And advice guru Dan Savage agrees!

Click below for his hilarious two cents:

Savage Love Podcast Episode 129

Iowa, Vermont, and D.C. !

Over the past two weeks Sweden, Iowa, and Vermont have all legalized same-sex marriage! Sweden and Vermont by legislative action, Iowa by a unanimous state supreme court ruling. The District of Columbia also voted unanimously to recognize marriages and unions from states that offer them.

It appears now that the Iowa ruling will stick, and especially strongly, as Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal has blocked an amendment to overturn the court ruling.

 The Vermont legislature also voted today to override a veto by Governor Jim Douglas by a two-thirds majority, making gay marriage legal in the state.

I think Judge Judy sums it up best:

 It seems we’re on a bit of a streak lately….let’s hope it continues! It seems Americans are growing more intelligent  and compassionate every day.

Texas School Board Hilarity

It seems the Texas State Board of Education is at it again. The state science standards are up for review again, and some of the comments made by boardmembers are quite interesting. Keep in mind 7 out of the 15 board members are BIBLICAL-LITERALIST, YOUNG-EARTH CREATIONISTS:

“If I can’t understand it, it’s not science.” – Rick Augusto

“Argument from authority is the most persuasive kind of evidence there is.” -Don McLeroy

“Science isn’t ruled by consensus” – Don McLeroy

“Someone has to stand up to these experts” – Don McLeroy

Listen to Don McLeroy make a fool of himself:

Listen to Eugenie Scott give the logical and polite argument for the science community:

The scariest thing is that this board determines the textbooks for the entire state of Texas, and as the largest purchaser of textbooks in the nation, really sets the tone that textbook publishers follow nationwide.

You can learn more about the fight for legitimate science education in Texas here.