We Need Healthcare Reform!

Hi Everyone,

Well, I'm back with a vengeance. I started slacking off, though there's been plenty to write about in the last week plus. I then took a camping trip into the Anza-Borrego desert, and a daytime visit to San Diego. Then in between my parents returning (yes, I still live with my parents), and doing some work in my garage, I kept forgetting to post, though there is plenty of material to post on. But I'm back, baby! And I've got a lot to tell you about.

Since HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius declared that the public option is "not the essential element" of reform (what is the essential element, Kathy?), political observers everywhere have been rushing to write the death certificate of the public option. First, the left wing activist base was in despair, but today, they've gotten fired up anew for the public option. This is exactly what needs to be happening right now. This is exactly the moment when we need to step up and make the people's real voices heard.

The powerful insurance lobby and right-wing lobby groups like "FreedomWorks" and "Americans for Prosperity" have been organizing and sending anti-health care protest mobs around the country. Some disagreement is legitimate, as this health care plan has flaws. The reason I and others have said "mobs" is because these crowds are shouting down all other views with disingenuous slogans, harassing congressmen, even sending out death threats. One man even showed up at a town meeting where the President was going to speak in New Hampshire with a gun in plain site. This is the only time I can recall where someone did that without being arrested on the spot.

Now we all know the reason why these anti-health care protesters are getting so much press. The media is controlled by a handful of corporations, as we detailed earlier. The health care industry is at the mercy of insurance executives. Would it be a stretch to say that the media has a vested interest in keeping the insurance industry wealthy and free of reform? I don't think so, but maybe I'm just paranoid.

This much I do know: more and more people are going bankrupt because of insurance. People are having to go without insurance. Thousands of people (18,000 the last time I checked) are dying a year because of a lack of insurance, a lack of preventative care, and all the rest. Imagine if 18,000 Americans were killed in a year because of some foreign military threat. What would the people who are now protesting health reform would be advocating. Maybe if you go to one of these town halls, you can mention to the protesters that because of the companies' extra profits, 18,000 Americans end each year in their graves.

You've probably heard all the scare tactics that so-called "teabaggers" have been using at these town halls. They have gotten all their information from Fox and Rush Limbaugh. Most of them will believe anything these sources tell them, and the voices they're hearing are about as honest as used car salesmen. They say "socialism" "communism" "fascism" and, my personal favorite, "get your government hands off my medicare!" Medicare is that goverment hand. It seems like, for all the suspicion people have about government, it works surprisingly well for them. It is hardly surprising, since most Americans still support health care reform, that the insurance lobby has had to set off this firebomb to keep reform at bay.

They have their slogans, their buzzwords, manufactured to make already scared and upset get mad at the people that are trying (however imperfectly) to fix the problem, instead of the people who are truly doing them wrong. Do I blame the people at the town halls, doing the shouting? Not particularly (unless they're making death threats and all). I blame the corporate executives and crooked politicians who will do anything, even leave people to die, to get more. More profit, more power. And I blame their well-paid cheerleaders in the media (you know who you are) who are equally hungry for wealth and fame. They bear the true responsibility in this, and they are the ones that need to answer for this.

If you've heard, or followed, President Obama for any length of time, you've probably heard him say "Change doesn't come from Washington, it comes to Washington," or some variation thereof. Ever wonder what he means by that? It means that it is not his job alone to help bring lasting reform to Washington; the rest of us must work to sway our Representatives, Senators, even the President himself, in that direction. I've noticed that, throughout our history, when movements have developed, the cry for change, justice, and the common good, eventually became so great that those in Washington had to heed the call, if they wanted to keep their jobs.

The cry for health care reform is not being broadcast in the media, but it is there. The news media is not reporting on it because it isn't convenient for the media. It's more convenient for the media to report on the mobs shouting their meaningless, hollow cries of "socialism," "communism," "marxism," and everything bad under the sun, because that makes news. People standing for real reform doesn't make news as readily. But make no mistake; the voices are there. It's up to us to make the voices calling for a healthier, more compassionate America heard.

We need our own catchphrases and slogans that make people feel good about it, instead of bad. I've got some ideas. How about "A healthy America is a safe America," or just saying "Health care for everyone is a GOOD thing." I just wish that would get home to people. The most rotten thing that opponents of reform have done have taken good things, like community organizing, leveling the economic playing field, or getting affordable health care plans to all our citizens, and made people deride them or suspect them. Well, I've got news for the far right faction in this country: community organizing, leveling the economic playing field, and getting affordable health care to all our citizens are ALL GOOD THINGS! And don't let anyone tell you differently.

Just think back to last election. The skinny kid with a funny name was promising change, first he was ignored, then he was mocked, then he was attacked, then he was elected president. All this happened because people decided they wanted to send him money, they wanted to knock on doors, to make sure the change we still need could come. The election was an important first step. But it didn't guarantee that things would change. Obama himself may need to be persuaded at some point, but, in the President's own words "This is no time to slow down, and it is certainly no time to lose heart." Call your Representative, your Senator, or the White House and tell them you support the public option (I called them today). Organize a rally or attend a town hall meeting to show your support.

If you want to correspond directly with me on how you can do any of these things, email me at ttechnician@hotmail.com for some direction. It doesn't matter what you choose to do. As long as you stand for affordable health care for as many Americans as possible (the public option being the best route toward that goal), that's the important part. Let me leave you with a quote from a British health administrator,taken from Sicko, to which I applauded, and which you can use to answer some criticisms on grounds of too much government spending, "If we can get government money to kill people, we can just as easily get it to help people." Now is the time to say, Yes We Can.

This is the Daily Reeder, Over&out.

Nobody cares? Don't think so!

Hi everybody,

Well, that post the other day about Bush got me down, but it's important to realize that thankfully, that's in the past now. And since then, I've read two articles that have warmed my heart and fueled a growing sense of optimism I've been having about our country's direction. One article talks about the nature of activism today, the other dismisses the notion that youth, that is, my peers, are apathetic when it comes to politics.

Alright, on the first article. The fact that the protesters aren't taking to the streets like they were in the '60's means that nobody really cares anymore, right? Not according to what this article finds. The world is different today than it was back in the '60's, so doesn't it make sense that the activism would change, too?

The study finds that instead of focusing on huge national issues, today's youth activists choose to pool their, well, our, efforts in a more productive way to make changes in our communities. The author suggests that today's youth generation is getting into battles they can win, as they put it, "Learning the art of the possible."

Perhaps this methodology of changing things in your own midst is a wise one. If a vast majority of young volunteers change things in a positive way in their own schools or cities, then soon the whole state or country will start to reflect this. As an old saying goes, "If everyone kept their front yard clean, the whole world will be free of garbage." I don't remember the exact words, but the words were to the same effect.

In 1989, 66% of college students reported doing volunteer work during their last year of high school. In 2004, 83% of college students reported doing this. There have been many more institutionalized opportunities to get involved with helping communities. I had to do 40 hours of volunteer work to graduate from high school.

At first I was peeved at the prospect of "having to"do something, because I generally don't like being told what to do. But I grew to like doing the volunteer work that I did with my church, which was taking an hour every week to help young kids get their homework done. I developed such a knack for it that I continued to help out after I completed the 40 hours I needed to graduate. Indeed, I have continued after I graduated.

Additionally, the article notes that in the 2004 election, they say, a new generation of politically-involved youth was created. These articles were written a few years ago, so they say youth voters continued to grow in the 2006 midterms, when the first woman ever to become speaker of the house assumed that role.

But the articles were before the 2008 election, which obviously took the youth involvement to a whole new level. This past election has seen the first African-American elected to the highest office and to recieve the highest calling of all, made higher still by all the crises we face. So along with the rise of youth involvement, we also saw a more diverse makeup of non-white males getting into these offices.

Anyway, onto the next article. The article sets up the myth for us that all youth are largely apathetic on politics, that we are largely self-centered. The author flatly rejects this image, and again, 2004 is pointed to as the beginning of this upsurge. This was also before 2008 or even 2006.

Youth (my generation, currently college-age) sees political involvement in a different way than previous generation. Today's young activists are wearing bracelets and using the internet for political discovery and action.

Even the President of the United States, now, has caught on. Barack Obama owes a large part of his success to having utilized the internet, and thus mobilizing the younger generation, for his campaign. Now, as president, his administration has used the internet to make information more widely accessible to the public, perhaps for his goal of "transparency."

Also, I am pleased to announce that I am not alone in this blog. According to the article, there are 917,999 others like me (young people with politically-themed blogs), and this was in 2006. I wonder what a similar early 2009 study would show.

The article also busts the myth that young people are all democrats. While 66% of the 18-25 demographic voted for Obama in 2008, this doesn't mean they're democrats, it just means they voted for Obama. This article states that while those of what they're calling the "Millenial Generation" want to get involved, we are skeptical of party politics and partisanship.

The article says that this is a positive thing, which it is, because politicians will have to work more on the issues that are important to us. I think it's always a positive thing to keep some critical distance from the whole party thing. Too often one party starts calling the other bad, and vice versa. You know what I'm saying, the conservatives attack the liberals, the liberals attack conservatives, and it becomes more of a pissing match than a way of bringing about change.

As one person noted in the political science class I am now taking, and for which I read these articles, said,"There's too much drama in politics." Everybody chuckled at such a frank assessment, but it was true. It was one of those things that was even more funny because it was true.

Another observation from that class concluded that my generation's consensus was that there was too much partisanship, too much meanness in politics. According to the study, we seek authentic solutions to these issues. This is one of the reasons I created this blog, was to hear some of your ideas on the issues.

Anyway, I hope these stories make you, the reader (or Reeder) as heartwarmed by these findings as I was, and let me know what you think, if you have any stories or experiences on the subject, I'd love to hear them. I should have plenty more ripe blog material from this poli sci course, so stay tuned!

This is the Daily Reeder, Over&out.