America At A Crossroads, Finale (aka Part IV)

Well, the election is less than 2 weeks away, and now it is crunch time for the campaigns.  In previous posts, I discussed the beginnings of our country, it's values, it's ideals, it's goals from the Founders' own words.  Also, included were a look at some of the typically outrageous and contradictory statements made by our leaders to examine the veracity and believability of what they vocalize publicly and for the record, a discussion of the importance of balancing our budget and saving our economy, but perhaps most telling is the current state of affairs. 

I, for one, think our country can do so much better than the status quo.  During my college years I studied history and political science, and it has remained a hobby and passion of mine in the many years since those school days.  We are faced with some less than inspiring choices this time around.  Quite simply this election will come down to a few issues and factors, and little else will matter. 

Do you vote for Obama because you still see the man from 2008 and ignore his performance of the past 4 years?  Or do you see his presidency as a dismal failure to help our country get back on it's economic feet?  Do you think he simply needed 4 years of on the job experience so he could really do the work he wanted to do?  Or do you think he already gave us his best, and he simply failed?  Do you want 4 more years of the same stuff we have just endured?  Or do you want to change direction figuring at least that is anywhere but down? 

Well, I certainly will not persuade any voters to change their minds.  Everyone, and I do mean everyone, is resistant to being persuaded these days.  At best, you can simply hope to share an idea and get someone to take it as their own and run with it in support of your view. 

So, I will just toss out a few topics and provide my usual twist of looking at things differently. 

Obamacare and the battle over requiring all employers to offer insurance covering contraception.  Many women in our country obviously view contraception as a first amendment right of some kind.  They feel it is so inalienable, it is a moral crime to even think or suggest it not be covered.  Yet, some religions, specifically Catholics, view contraception as morally abhorrent and against their faith.  Most still say they should simply shut up and color.  The will of the many.  Guess what?  It is not a simple black and white issue.  Or is it?

Do you think of contraception as a way to prevent disease?  The pill and implants do not protect from HIV or other sexually transmitted diseases.  So, that can't be it. 

Is it a matter of telling those backwards religions to get with the times?  Okay, so the first amendment is now clearly in the firing line.  I guess if we can tell people what to think about their religion's values and it's okay, then atheists can shut the frak up and start praying in schools.  After all, we like to award majority rules and certainly there are more Christians than Atheists out there.  Oh wait, that would be wrong too.

Contraception is a way to limit the growth of population.  Rich people can afford it but not the poor or lower middle classes.  The government must force all insurance to offer it (preferably free) to be fair.  This way the government can limit certain demographic groups from continuing to procreate and balloon the rolls of public assistance, since the less affluent are the ones who must have it included to afford it.  Oh, I see.  How many millions of less than desirable children do you think the government can stop in the next 10-20 years?  Wow, I had no idea how many people who seem so enlightened and ardent in the support of this issue wanted to insure the systematic prevention of poverty done from the population control side.  Seems rather heartless, if brutally efficient in its simplicity.  I wonder why the Catholics would oppose it?  Probably because the idea is morally abhorrent to them.  But wait, their religion is backwards and needs to be driven from our society.  Which is it? 

Listen, I provide these devils advocate points to show how non-black and white the issue is.  Those who think it is so clear I doubt have ever even considered some of the points here.  Honestly, I do not have a problem with insurance offering contraception in their plans, but I do think forcing religious groups who oppose it in their very core beliefs to be an abuse of government power.  If you want to compromise, why not find a way to make some national plan for contraception available outside of the insurance mandate? 

On the issue of Obamacare itself, I still say it is the wrong approach to the problem.  Yes, the health insurance issue has a major overhaul need.  Let companies offer plans across state lines.  Require everyone to be offered basic emergency health care services for a flat per person rate, for everyone in that state.  And I do think their needs to be an allowance for increased premiums for people with pre-existing conditions like obesity, cancer, etc.  But, there can be limits to the premiums and to the coverage.  I would invite the best people from the world of insurance to put forth ideas between now and next summer.  If they can't come up with something, then maybe you hold Obamacare in your back pocket? 

I still contend, having the government essentially oversee health care is going to be a terrible, horrible thing.  Many people will die because of this.  First it will drive our country deeper and deeper into debt, since there will no longer be any competition to keep prices in check.  Secondly, innovation will begin to dissipate since there will no longer be the financial incentive to develop new treatments and the billions of dollars companies used to spend in research will instead be diverted into lobbying the government institutions responsible for patient care to simply choose them over a competitor.  Thirdly, once those in charge finally grasp the sheer monumental costs associated with all health care, someone will finally invent the chart which will ultimately determine patient care: a person's value versus the cost to treat them.  Sadly, when many of today's people in my generation start getting into their senior years, then and only then will the "I told you so" kick in and they will realize they actually provided the nails for their own coffin. 

Sarah Palin is certainly not a mental giant, or political genius, far from it.  I honestly thought she was a terrible choice for VP (not that Joe Biden was any great selection himself).  But she did get it right when she mentioned "death panels" in her time campaigning.  Even as the debate over ObamaCare raged, anyone who mentioned death panels or rationing was called all kinds of names and treated as a delusional freak. 

Simple logic led many of us to understand the easy math involved:

Take a nation already buried in debt, add a very large and growing senior citizen base reaching the age where they will begin to need much more health care (lots more need, less supply, lots more cost); add the next generation is considered largely obese (and getting more so) and thus will likely need more health care at a younger age (even more need, even more cost, and oh yeah, less people working now to pay for all of this) and it equals not enough money, not enough treatment, thus somebody will have to decide whether to spend $100K to replace 10 hips or knees, or to provide cancer treatment for a mid-20s citizen.  Anyone with a simple understanding of basic math can figure this one out. 

Honestly, I think government health care will lead to a further decline in the quality and availability of care in our country.  Eventually, a panel of bureaucrats chosen for their political connections or brutal efficiency in managing costs will be put in charge.  And those in our generation who supported this new plan will get to face the first death panels when they come along.  And they will.  Why even one of Barrack Obama's most trusted officials has declared so publicly.  Steven Rattner, who President Obama appointed to be his "car czar" in the Treasury Department acknowledges the need for rationing health care (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/17/opinion/health-care-reform-beyond-obamacare.html?_r=0). 

Yes, an Obama Administration official laid out the actual case for rationing.  I guarantee he is not the only one who sees this as a necessary and likely outcome.

Like I said, yes, we need insurance reform.  I just think many people should take one last look at the big picture, and be real clear what the future holds for their choice. 

Its The Money Stupid

Every day we are bombarded with problems that need to be solved: health care, poverty, home ownership, education, hunger, and my personal favorite, fairness.

Apparently the only thing preventing those in office from solving them all is money.  But the harsh reality is this, there is never going to be enough money to solve all the world's problems, or even our own country's problems.  Not now, not ever.  So, we need to quit electing people who think government revenue is the key to solving all our problems.

In the end, what has government really given us?  The answer is this: nothing that someone didn't have to give up first.  Government cannot give one dime to any program, person or cause that it did not first take from someone else. 

Listen, I don't think for a minute electing Mitt Romney as president is anywhere near as important as the election of Abraham Lincoln was in 1860.  He isn't a Reagan in 1980 either.  I simply believe our country is headed in the wrong direction, I think we are better than the status quo and the current occupant of the White House has had 4 years to get his ideas to work.  If wishes were reality, then Walt Disney would have been the greatest president ever.  Simply put, I want other ideas.  I don't think the GOP will take the Senate, I think some House seats will be lost, so Romney will have to work well with both parties to get things done. 

I sincerely hope he puts Ron Paul in his cabinet (Treasury Secretary would be nice), I hope he can find a solution to the Iran issue soon and get Pakistan back in line before they too become a problem (since they already have plenty of nukes). 

So, get out there and vote.  Please do so as an informed citizen and carefully weigh your positions.   I know my family will be out there, complete with another eligible voter in 2012. 

Of course, only now as I conclude my blogs do I realize it is all for naught.  We may see the election results, but the winner will never take office since the world will be ending December 21, 2012, the Mayans said so.  :-)