Oct. 2010 Politics Part 2

Part 2 of 3: Lie on, Tigris and Bare

Politicians continue to lie on and on about what is and isn’t in the healthcare reform that passed earlier this year. Security along both sides of the Tigris River as it weaves through Iraq is now the responsibility of Iraqis. Threadbare rules on Wall Street that led to the near collapse of our financial system are being rewoven. A lot of things have happened over the last 21 months. Some of it is bad. But some isn’t as bad as detractors would lead you to believe.

Healthcare Reform

Several presidents have tried to tackle health care reform and failed. Health care was a cornerstone of Obama’s platform during the election and, to his credit, he got a comprehensive package passed. We must have wanted it or we wouldn’t have elected him. The status quo of double digit increases in health insurance costs and a growing class of uninsured (and uninsurable) had to be stopped, or at least slowed down. Even many Republicans acknowledged that, although half-heartedly.

From the beginning all options were on the table as far as Obama was concerned, even if his own party disagreed. He preferred a government option but didn’t require one. Tort reform, mandates, taxes, and more were all open for discussion. Obama, concerned with other matters as president, delegated the details and law writing to Congress. In retrospect, he probably should have been more hands on from the beginning. Who knew that the members of Congress would act like a bunch of school kids who don’t like each other?

About 2,400 pages later, we have healthcare, errr… health insurance reform.

Broad strokes, as confusing as it is, it does accomplish a lot of good things. A lot more people will be insured, costs go up but not as fast, and there is a lot of help for low/middle class taxpayers AND small businesses. Republicans didn’t get the tort reform they wanted but you would think they’d be happy that the meat of the law doesn’t include a public option and that it does have the mandate – which was their idea.

Confused? Stop listening to revisionist history and you’ll find that Nixon was a proponent of mandates. Oh, and most of the Republican party during the Clinton administration. Free market providers with tax related mandates were their ideas to fight against Hillary’s failed attempt to reform healthcare during the 1990’s. Too far back for you? Current millennium – Mitt Romney, with Scott Brown’s help, passed similar laws for Massachusetts.

Be careful what you wish for? Now that Republicans got what they wanted (without their actual help) they don’t want it anymore. Instead of trying to fix the flaws in the health insurance reform they perpetuate lies about what is in the law and talk about repealing it in its entirety. A few random thoughts:

• Tort reform.   It’s not too late. It has come up separately from healthcare reform many times. Pass some.
• Socialized medicine.  As passed, the law is far from it. And it won’t lead to the U.S. turning into a communist country. Am I the only one who was confused by the old farts who protested against a single payer system (which we didn’t get) because they didn’t want socialized medicine… but then they said “don’t touch my Medicare,” which is a single payer system? (It should be illegal to make chocolate – but don’t take away my chocolate?)
• Reporting requirements.   Don’t be scared into believing that the reporting of your health insurance costs on your W-2 is bad. It’s just a reporting item – it isn’t taxed and it shouldn’t be a burden for employers. What IS a reporting burden is the new requirement (starting 2012) that businesses issue 1099s to all payees of $600 or more. I get why it’s in the law, but there are other ways to accomplish some of the goals without being such a burden on small business. PLEASE FIX!
• Abortions.  Without getting into the whole pro-life/pro-choice debate, there is specific language in the law plus a presidential mandate that prevent government funding of abortions. If those aren’t good enough for the pro-lifers then maybe they should consider some additional restrictions. But don’t throw the baby, um… reform, out with the bathwater.
• Death panels.  Insurance provided counseling, which didn’t make it into the final bill, was denounced as “death panels” because of a perceived (erroneous) bias toward euthanizing the elderly. Some who continue to want a complete repeal still use this as a reason even though it didn’t pass. What cracks me up is the irony of it all. Insurance, by its very nature, is somewhat of a death panel in the sense that lines are being drawn at every level about what is and isn’t covered. If something isn’t covered and the person can’t afford to pay out of pocket for a treatment (that may or may not work) then the insurance company (panel) has sentenced them to death. “Sorry, not covered. Prepare to die. NEXT.”

Insurance can’t cover everything and in the end we all die. Preferably later than sooner. The whole idea of healthcare reform was to help provide a minimum standard of care available to everyone without regard to pre-existing conditions and without sending people into personal bankruptcy if they get sick. It’s not perfect, but I believe the health insurance reform has more good than bad. It’s unfortunate that it is so complicated and so misunderstood by the general public, but in time I think we’ll appreciate the benefits and legislative patches will mitigate some of the shortcomings.

And to those who would suggest that we “tear down those laws” I would say “Ney!” We passed these laws to help “promote the general welfare.” A Constitutional mandate long ignored.

War

What is the definition of “winning” these days? War, today, is not about taking over real estate and adding to our global footprint. It’s not about stopping Nazis from increasing theirs. It’s not about Borg-like assimilation of other cultures. And, post-Bush, I don’t think it’s about regime change. Isn’t it about security? Isn’t it about protecting the safety of our citizens? Not just in the United States, but British and French citizens on trains, people in Bali and India at hotels, and so many others. Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, and even a few atheists… we are at war to create a safer world for all people.

So how do we win? How do you fight an enemy you can’t discern from the color of their skin, the clothes they wear or the religion they practice? This enemy doesn’t care about political borders or government or peace. We aren’t fighting the 1.5 billion Muslims on the planet, we are trying to protect ourselves from a few thousand (maybe less) radicals who claim to be Muslim but who are also willing to blow up other Muslims on a regular basis.

I don’t know the answer. But I hope, for the most part, that we are doing the right things at home, in Iraq, in Afghanistan and in other places around the world. A lot of people have criticized Obama for how he’s handled the war on terror. Shortly after taking office he more than doubled our troop levels in Afghanistan. In September of last year, after a botched Afghan election in August, the military recommended significant additional troop levels beyond what had already been sent. Because he didn’t quickly rubber stamp a report from a general he was accused of being a bad commander-in-chief who lacked the military experience necessary to understand what needed to be done. I think he knew more than the public realizes. For starters, he knew to ask more questions.

You can’t just call up the president of a sovereign country that you are trying to help and say “My generals tell me we need more boots on the ground. It’s for your own good. They are on the way.”

This war is unlike any other and no war is just about a military solution. There are many political and diplomatic factors in play – with allies and the leaders of the countries where the troops are to be deployed. It took about two months for the White House to publicly acknowledge the additional troops for Afghanistan, but a lot of diplomacy and additional research went on during those two months. And the influx of additional troops was to be faster than originally outlined in September, so don’t tell me that the delay caused the whole plan to be pushed out to the detriment of the soldiers already there because I’m not buying it.

Working to eliminate safe havens for terrorists to take root and multiply is our best option to increase safety. This includes military actions, diplomacy and (like it or not) some level of nation building. In the end, can we ever really “win”? There will always be some terrorists out there. Some Muslim, some Christian, and some just plain whack-a-doo. Reducing their numbers and their ability to inflict damage is all we can do.

A Mosque in New York

Unbelievable. Some politicians and conservative pundits have overtly created a negative campaign against all people of a specific faith. Even an old Jew from Jersey knows that we aren’t at war with all Muslim. The “Ground Zero Mosque” is a myth created to scare people into hating Muslims – apparently for political gain. A “myth” because a) it isn’t at ground zero and b) it’s actually a community center open to all faiths with a portion designated as a prayer room for Muslims. Is there a “no churches allowed in Oklahoma City” rule because McVeigh was a Roman Catholic?

On this same topic, if you haven’t seen the clip from The Daily Show about how the funding for the Community Center near Ground Zero can be traced back to Fox News then you should. Here’s the link:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-23-2010/the-parent-company-trap

Financial Reform

After years of hacking away at protections put into place after the great depression to reduce the risk of financial catastrophes we got… a financial catastrophe. Go figure.

In theory, I still believe in free-market capitalism, but we have two problems.
1) As we’ve moved toward a global economy, capitalism only works if everyone plays. Chinese flat-screens and tennis shoes are cheaper because they don’t play by the rules. This is just one example of why TRUE capitalism is probably dead.
2) Greed and stupidity. (Maybe that is two problems, making a total of three?) The last dozen years have proven that you can’t have unchecked capitalism. Enron, Worldcom, financial institutions leveraged 50 to one and lending 110% loan-to-value, some guy named Bernie…

A couple months ago we finally got some long overdue financial reform. I’m of the opinion that the reforms don’t go far enough to protect borrowers and investors, but they should curb some of the stupidity that turns financial thunderstorms into hurricanes.

John McCain still hasn’t learned from his involvement in the S&L scandal of the late 1980s and the rest of the Republicans haven’t learned from the more recent financial meltdown that you have to have regulations. These mouth pieces for Wall Street bankers continue to thwart attempts to create a stable financial structure by sticking to their theme of deregulation in the name of free-market capitalism. Maybe they don’t watch the news.

I think I can learn to live with the watered-down version of capitalism that we are ending up with. Promote business, innovation and success – but regulate for health and financial safety. Would a capitalist put seatbelts in every car? Hell no, they’re expensive. But we do it. Do we shun lead in out toys and paint? Yes (China will learn eventually). Do we require more transparency of derivative investment products? Hmm… still not enough.

 
So many more topics I wanted to cover with this article. Maybe I should have started earlier in the month and chopped this into a 5-part series instead of three. 
Gitmo – Still open? Don’t-ask-don’t-tell – Still not repealed?
Immigration reform, global warming, and math/science scores that are dropping in relation to other countries. So many hot topics, so little time.

Stay tuned for the third part of this October 2010 series, which should be out on Friday.
I’ll be attempting some math – not an easy task for a licensed CPA.

Comments or criticisms? Please share below or email your confidential thoughts to christopher@grasshutandcoconuts.com.