CHANGE OF FUTURE

by Ruth A. Sheets

We need a very different future than was on the drawing board before COVID19 hit.  Our representatives and fellow Americans need to take a variety of actions to change the trajectory of this nation and the world.  COVID19 has clearly pointed out problems our leaders have chosen to ignore in the past.  The time of ignorance is now gone and we must step up to meet the challenges facing us.

The following are some actions we can take to reshape the future in ways that will benefit everyone.

1. Global warming will move front and center in our thinking and every action.
a. we must become less of a super consumer society and more a reduce, reuse, and recycle kind of folks, with recycling plants all over the place.
b. Everyone will need solar panels and electric vehicles should become the standard.
c. Burning coal, except at limited levels will be outlawed,
d. Massive funding of renewable energy sources will take place, like the “man on the moon” efforts of the 1960s.

2. The flora and fauna that share our planet will have a more prominent place in our thinking and planning.  –

3. Our oceans must stop being our dumping place and our places for drilling and destruction.

4. Health care in this nation should be universal and supervised by the government.  No one should be making money on the suffering of others beyond salaries and general expenses.

5. Education should be funded at levels sufficient to provide children and young adults with the knowledge they will need to effectively maintain a career, participate actively in the life of the community in which they live, and be active informed citizens in the society.

6. The United States Postal Service, which is called for in the Constitution should be appropriately funded and should be able to perform basic banking  activities, particularly for lower income persons who may not be able to afford a bank.

7. Our prison system needs to be revamped so rehabilitation and treatment are the goals rather than just hiding away people of color in private for profit institutions.  No prison should be run by any entity but the local, state, or federal government who sentenced the prisoners.

8. Immigration will be addressed.  We need the general public to understand that refugees would not
be leaving their homes unless circumstances forced them to do so.
a. There should be a path to citizenship for all who were brought to or came to this country as children and it should not cost them a fortune.
b. The detention/concentration camps for immigrants will be closed and those imprisoned in them will be quickly and properly processed, most allowed to stay here.
c. Anyone who is a parent of US citizen children should have a path to citizenship too so they can stay and provide for those children.
d. In short, deportations need to stop.
e. Bans on citizens of other nations unless we are specifically at war with that nation or face a pandemic must stop permanently and not be allowed to be manipulated by a president or political party for its own edification.

9. Voting at all levels should involve automatic registration upon reaching 18 and mail-in options for anyone who chooses that, particularly during a natural disaster.
a. Voting security will be a priority.
b. voter suppression and gerrymandering will be permanently disallowed.  

10. Congressional procedures must change.
a. No one person in Congress should be able to block all legislation and votes on issues critical to the people of the nation and use extortion as Mr. McConnell has done for the past 5 years.
b. There should be a 60 vote majority in the Senate or a +5 votes to the number of senators in the majority to approve anyone for a lifetime appointment to a court.
c. Lobbyists must be removed from central positions in our government and lobbying should be a volunteer activity in which no favors or gifts can be passed to or from government officials.  Corporations and individuals with huge money pots should not be able to have more governmental influence than less wealthy individuals and groups.

11.  -Women and men will be legally recognized as equals and people will be respected and heard no matter their race, age, gender, LGTB status, political party, or any other factor.
a. Women will have the right to choose what happens to their own bodies
b. All kinds of reproductive health care will be available to all persons on request, including contraception and pregnancy services.  
c. LGTBQ citizens will have the full rights of any citizen without exception.
d. A committee will be assembled to begin addressing issues of reparation for African-Americans related to slavery and the racism that followed.

12. Workers will have basic rights and a living wage through a “workers’ bill of rights which will include paid sick leave, child care, and other needed services and protections.

13. Taxes on the wealthiest will be considerably higher than pre-COVID19, after companies are up and running and workers are back on the job, perhaps, a 2-year window after the crisis is past).

14. We will become more prepared for everything including natural disasters, pandemics, and more through appropriate funding.

15. We need to employ experts to get these actions going and share findings with everyone who can help.

16. We need to set ethical standards for whom we will nominate for public office and hold them to those standards.  The “lesser of two evils” should no longer be an acceptable means for judging a person’s ability to govern.  This one can’t be legislated, but it can be promoted through all media.

17. Dividers among us need to take a back seat for a while so others can succeed in bringing us together to accomplish this work.

This is an ambitious agenda, but we will need an ambitious agenda if we are to have a prosperous nation and a livable world, and we are running out of time to get this going.  This time of “sheltering in place” may give us all time to think about how we will live the next few years, what kind of world we will leave our children and grandchildren, what kind of people we will become through and beyond this crisis.  We have the time, let’s use it wisely.

WHAT HAVE REPUBLICANS DONE FOR US? (revisited)

We all hear Republican candidates claiming they want to “Make America Great again,” and before that "Take America back again."  They seem to want to return our nation to some mythical time when things were better.  I can’t help but wonder, better for whom. 

If we look at what Republicans have done in the past few decades, it is not clear what that mythical time looks like to them.  It certainly is not a place most Americans would like to live in.

I have been trying to think of one thing the Republicans have done for America in, let's say, the past 40 years.  That should be long enough for a party to do something positive for the nation.  It is true they have made the rich richer, given tax breaks to the wealthiest, started a few wars, tortured a lot of prisoners, vastly increased the prison population of the country, ran a completely incompetent "war on drugs," but what was gained by  any but the top 1%?

I have only considered contributions by Republicans to American society since 1980 or so.  Going back further would have been too painful.  Check out these important categories that touch the lives of most Americans and Republican contributions.

Education:  Republican education reformers came up with vouchers which take tax payer money and give it to private and religious schools while neglecting the public schools as much as possible.  Charter schools were introduced, a vehicle for giving public money to private companies and individuals to provide educational services, whether or not those people or companies are competent.  The current Secretary of Education is totally behind these measures and contributes part of her fortune to promote them. 

Health care:  Republicans tore down every attempt to introduce programs that could assure each American of affordable medical services.  They convinced many Americans that “Obamacare/socialized medicine” would be terrible for Americans when what they meant was it would be terrible for the wealthy medical insurance companies who sponsor their campaigns. (It actually  did not.)    Even extending insurance to poor children involved a fight.  They are still working hard to get rid of the Affordable Care Act that provides many millions with coverage they can afford, through sneaky underhanded means, tucked in bills passed at midnight.

Jobs:  Republicans say they create jobs, but they are not too interested in the quality of those jobs and whether or not those jobs provide a living wage.  They work constantly to break unions and to fight raising the minimum wage.  Most Republicans barely blink when a presidential candidate tells poor people that their kids should be hired as janitors so they can learn to “show up on Monday,” as Mitt Romney did in 2012.  The unemployment rate is going down, but wages are barely rising. 

Family Values:  Republicans would have us believe they have a lock on what it means to be family while ignoring their own principles.  It is OK, though since they ask forgiveness after they are caught and are immediately assumed to be repentant.  Some of the most prominent among Republicans speak of the sacredness of marriage while not honoring it very well themselves.  Their hatred of immigrants allows them to break up well established stable families so one or some of the members can be deported.

Women's Rights:  I know this is not really a Republican issue, but since nearly 50% of Republicans are women, it automatically becomes one.  Many of not most Republicans want to prohibit use of all birth control as well as abortion but do not want to provide assistance after the baby is born. "That would foster dependence on social programs."  The Republican  position should accurately be called “Right to Birth,” not “Right to life.”  It is not sufficient that they choose not to use these family planning techniques themselves, they want to dictate what everyone else is allowed to do. Republican state legislatures work very hard to criminalize abortion and the women who choose to have one.  At midnight they pass laws that outlaw abortion before most women are even aware they are pregnant.  They would prefer that abortions never be granted, that is, of course unless their life or their wife's life is at risk.  

Government Programs:  Republicans don’t want to have Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, Social Security or other Government programs, yet these are often the only safety nets that stand between citizens, even Republican citizens, and disaster.  Republicans do not create better programs, they just put barriers in front of people who need what currently exists.  Why, In their minds, of course there should be work requirements for those receiving Medicaid, the poorest, most struggling people among us.
  
Civil Rights:  Most bills that have come before Republican Congresses and presidents related to civil rights have been either ignored or watered down to mean essentially nothing.  Police are being militarized and that equipment is often used against people of color.  Segregation in our communities, schools, and other public places is nearly as strong as ever.

Size of Government:  Republicans claim Government is too large, and should be "drowned in a bathtub."  But under every Republican administration, our government grew significantly, particularly in the areas of the military, the war on drugs, homeland security.  Growth is good as long as the right people benefit.

Tax Reform:  Republicans HATE taxes.  They want all the benefits of having decent roads, police, fire, and deportation services, safe bridges, airports, sports stadiums but they don't want to have to pay for, and will work hard to avoid paying for them.  Companies are permitted to take profits off-shore, and for quite a while, companies were given tax breaks for moving abroad.  Any tax breaks go mostly to the wealthiest 1%.  Republicans think that's fair.

Environment:  President Nixon signed the Environmental Protection Agency into law in the early 1970's, but despite the amazing clean-up it has overseen, current Republicans are working very hard to dismantle the regulations that protect our air and water, so even the one really positive thing Republicans have done is being corrupted.  Make as much money as you can and to hell with the destruction caused.  Someone will clean it up later. 

So, what do Republicans have to offer America?  It is certainly not anything to benefit average Americans.  If the past is any indication, unless we can get some Republicans out of office, our nation will continue on this destructive course, and the rich will get richer and the rest of us poorer.

WHEN ALMOST NO ONE WANTS IT

By Ruth A. Sheets

Since the election of Donald Trump, by Electoral College, the Trump administration thinks that somehow they have a mandate to do anything, and I mean anything.

When a candidate loses an election by 3 million votes, yet still "wins," it does not indicate any kind of mandate.  It is a time when the elected official should be trying to court the American people and learn what they, more than the 25% or so who put Mr. Trump over the top,  feel they need and want.  This has not happened. 

Net Neutrality?  There is no evidence that a majority of Americans want to end net neutrality and want a few corporations to have a say as to what and how much goes over the internet, and for how much.  Congress has passed a law giving permission to corporations to even sell your personal information to other companies if they choose.  I did not see/hear anywhere that Americans want that, yet, Congress and Mr. Trump did it anyway.

Tax Reform?  Has anyone officially weighed in on whether they are in favor of the huge tax cut for the richest Americans proposed by Mr. Trump's tax reform plan (the (ACHA as well)?  Do Americans want the largest corporations to have such a low tax rate that they will hardly be obligated for taxes to cover the public resources they use up?  Of course not.  Does anyone believe these corporations will in a positive way, invest the windfall in more jobs?  Not likely. 

Health Care?  When the ACA was being worked out, many individuals and medical organizations, as well as the insurance industry were asked for their input.  There were public hearings.  However, citizens were told by people with bigger mouths than the average that this law would be tragic and would bankrupt us all.  Of course there was no evidence, but so what.  The people, mostly Middle America bought the lies and no Republican lawmakers voted for ACA (Affordable Care Act).  They named it Obamacare and dismissed it at every turn, trying to repeal it 60 times and parts of it even more often.

Something strange happened when coverage began, though, people started to like what it offered them:  lower premiums, health care they had not had for a long time (if ever), the ability to have their children on their plans to age 26, pre-existing conditions covered, contraception covered, assistance with maintaining better health through regular monitoring, prescriptions covered, Medicaid expanded to help more of the "least of these.".  You get the picture.  People were actually being served.  Now, who wants it eliminated?  Who wants it changed to uninclude the aspects mentioned above?  Mr. Trump, of course, and the House of Representatives who have already voted to do just that. 

The Senate currently has 13 men meeting together in secret to make up a new health care law to please a small sector of their supporters to "Repeal and Replace."  They call their work in progress "the American Health Care Act."

Like nearly everything else the Republicans in Congress come up with, the bill's title means exactly the opposite of what the law will actually do.  It will not provide health care to any but those who already have it through their jobs.  It will lower or eliminate the number of people served by Medicaid.  The House bill allows insurance companies to determine who and what will be covered.  Pre-existing conditions will only be covered if the company says it will be.  Serious, potentially expensive health care will be handled by some kind of inadequately funded state pool for those horrible sick people, implying they are sick by their own actions. 

If you want maternity care, or reproductive health care of any kind and you are not covered on your job, too bad.  That's on you.  Nearly everything is a pre-existing condition, even having had a C-section in the past. 

Who came up with this appalling bill (which, of course, we have not seen yet), 13 white men who could not possibly care less about people's health care.  They care only that they help the corporations who support their campaigns and look like they are cutting money from the budget.  (Even the insurance companies are not pleased with the House bill.)

Mr. Trump and his few supporters have way too much power and influence.  They are trying to push through legislation to please a particular minority who will, alas, be hurt by it too.  

The one thing that is certain.  If the bill were going to be good for all Americans, it would not be drawn up in secret by a few Senators who really don't know much about health care.  Something that might help here would be a law stating that the Congress must participate in whatever bill they pass.  They would get no other financial support for health care, and have to use their "hard-earned" bucks to pay out of pocket the thousands of dollars many health conditions cost.

If they have a disabled child, they will have to pay the cost the way any other citizen without another plan would pay.  You or your wife pregnant, no problem, you pay for all of it.  You can't afford another child, pay for the contraception.  Shot while practicing for a baseball game, no problem, pay out of pocket the percentage you must pay for the deductible and whatever percentage you agree is the one insurance companies can charge.

If you put yourself in the place of the people being served by the health care programs in this country, you will ditch the plans you are working on, and start over with hearings, a variety of people in the room helping to develop the legislation.  Serious discussion and input from a wide range of Americans of all backgrounds would take place, and you would welcome it because that is how a democracy should work. 

I don't see this happening, but  I hope your actions and the people you injure by your indifference and need to bow to Mr. Trump, who knows nothing about health care and cares less, will, in time, come back to bite you and you will feel some of the pain they have been feeling.  Americans don't want your brand of health care. 

Out of Control

by Ruth A. Sheets

A few years ago, author Malcolm Gladwell wrote a book that I believe is relevant to our current insanity.  The book, THE TIPPING POINT describes situations when actions started by a few individuals or small groups increase to a point where, for awhile at least, they are unstoppable, OUT OF CONTROL.  This point of no return is the tipping point.  I think we have reached it in relation to individual rights in our culture.

After “Roe v. Wade, and the Women’s Liberation Movement, most Americans began to see women in a more positive light, having a lot to contribute to the world outside the home.  Women began to slowly increase their level of education as well as the age at which they chose to have children, if they had any at all. 

Under Ronald Reagan, some of those advances began to reverse.  Public figures who were looking for a “cause” to champion chose anti-abortion because it had emotional appeal to the most conservative among us.  All sorts of righteous language could be flung into the minds of the portion of the population who are certain that God is on their side and that they have a direct line of communication to God. (admittedly it is generally through a series of writings that is more than 2,000 years old, but despite its contradictory nature, the Bible for many is the will of God.) 

This would not be such a problem if these Bible fanatics only wanted to hold their beliefs and practices for themselves.  Unfortunately, their mission is to make everyone else follow their beliefs.  They are fired up to pass laws and even alter the Constitutions of the United States and the various states to insure we all comply.

The Tipping Point came with the 2010 election.  Democrats in particular, forgot how important voting is in the years that end in “0” because of the redistricting due to population shifts.  The Hypocricans took over the House of Representatives in Washington and many state legislatures.  This gave them the go-ahead to step up their crusade.  And, boy did they get going.

Lately, when one state manages to get some restrictive law passed, others follow immediately like a set of dominoes falling. 

It happened with Gay Rights, voting restrictions, increasing the influence of business, limiting support for the poorest among us, and driving undocumented immigrants “back where they came from.” Before a lot of people took notice, many people were on their way to losing their rights.

Our members of Congress are unable to get anything done because they have tipped over into a place where they can’t see that what they are doing or allowing to be done is destructive to the American way of life, our democracy.  Our infrastructure is failing, our planet is suffering from severe climate change, our jobs are either paying obscenely high salaries or impossibly low wages, our banks risk money as if they have an unlimited supply, our Supreme  Court hands down the most outrageous decisions, our government can’t seem to control its appetite for spying on its own citizens and allies, our system of farm subsidies are long out of date.  Our military industrial complex cannot control its appetite.  The gap between the 1% and the 99% is widening every year.   

All of these challenges face us and what are Congress and state legislatures doing to address these real problems?  Not much, especially in the legislative bodies under the control of the Hypocricans with governors who are fully in step with them. 

Instead, they are trying to repeal Obamacare for the 40^th time.  They are writing and sneaking in provisions to limit women’s right to choose.  They are trying to limit or even eliminate food stamps.  They are trying to privatize public services so they won’t have to meet their obligation to pay reasonable salaries or pensions.  They are cutting funding to schools.  They are allowing interest for student loans to double.  They are trying to find ways to lure the richest among us into their jurisdictions with a tax pass while the community pays.  They are encouraging drilling and fracking for fossil fuels on public lands.

The only way to stop this runaway train is to start or join a movement that can ultimately tip thinking and actions in a different direction.  It has started.  The Defense of Marriage Act is dead on the Federal level.  California same sex couples can now marry.  Wendy Davis got national notice in Texas for her filibuster.  Even though none of these events brought about the desired change for everyone, it is a start and has drawn attention.  It’s up to all of us, those who care about human rights, to keep pushing the boulder of inclusion, acceptance, and the belief in the ability to make good decisions that will benefit all, up the hill of ignorance until it tips over into a better place.

One-Issue Decision? Not This Year

by muon

I made a list last night of all the issues, off the top of my head, that seem to hinge on this election. I'm sure I forgot something. Here's my list, in no particular order:

Unemployment
Education
Energy independence
Climate change
Renewable energy
Equal pay for women
Middle East, terrorism, war, national security
Healthcare
Women's healthcare, including contraceptives, abortion, and Planned Parenthood
Medicare and Social Security
Immigration
FEMA and crisis management
Infrastructure
Welfare, food stamps, other poverty issues
Science, Arts, PBS
Deficit
Gun control
Citizens United
Supreme Court appointees
Banking/mortgage industry problems
Foreign and Domestic Trade
Wealth imbalance

For all of you still undecided folks out there (if any), really, all you have to do is go down this list and decide who you trust to make policy for you on these issues, at the Presidential, Congressional, State and Local levels. For instance, if you're hit by a natural disaster in the next 4 years, do you want someone who acted the way President Obama, Governor Christie and Mayor Bloomberg acted this week, or say, the way President Bush acted during Hurricane Katrina? Do you want a president who'd shut down FEMA and tell the states to handle disasters themselves, even when their infrastructure is completely compromised?  You might say, oh, but I don't live in a natural disaster prone area. I thought so, too, until Hurricane Sandy.

These issues are the main reasons I'm voting, not only for Obama, but for all the Democrats on my ballot.  I say main reasons because there are others.

I refuse to vote for a party that condones and spreads the blatant lies of its presidential candidate. This week Mitch McConnell and other GOP leaders pressured the independent Congressional Research group to suppress a report showing that tax cuts for the wealthy do nothing to help the economy. I won't vote for anyone who has such a contempt for truth.

GOP leaders have gone out of their way to make voting more difficult this year. Voter ID laws, voter roll purging, laws restricting registration drives, reduced early voting in many states, and intimidation measures aimed at African-American and Latino voters are all forms of voter suppression. For the first time, the UN has sent monitors to the US to observe our elections. I'm not voting for the party that made all this happen.

Legislation in this country shouldn't be influenced by anyone but the voters. Many Democrats are in the pockets of lobbyists as much as Republicans, but the worst offenders right now--the Koch Brothers, Grover Norquist, the NRA, far-right religious fanatics, and Big Oil--are GOP cronies.

So that's the election in a nutshell for me. You're on your own.

Women DO Care About the Economy

Women in Binders protesting in Ohio

by muon

The other day Mitt Romney said all this talk about "women in binders" was just a diversion. He said women aren't all that concerned with "women's issues." He said what they really care about is the economy.

As for women caring about the economy, I couldn't agree more. So let me explain it to you, Mr. Romney.

You're the one who uttered the words "women in binders." It was part of your response to a question about the Lilly Ledbetter Act. Now, nevermind the fact that you lied about actively appealing to women's groups to find qualified women to fill cabinet posts (the women's group contacted you, not the other way around), the issue here is women who are often discriminated against in being considered for certain jobs in our society. If a woman can't find a job, simply because she's a woman, for her, that's an economic issue.

If a woman isn't paid equally for doing the same work as a man, especially if that woman's family depends on her paycheck to make ends meet, THAT's an economic issue.

If a woman can't afford contraceptives, and therefore can't plan a family according to what is affordable in her circumstances, THAT's an economic issue.  Not just a family issue, but a major national economic issue, because the more children who are born into poverty, the more strain it puts on social programs designed to help the poor. Of course, these are programs you'd just as soon take away from those children, but that won't change the fact that, without contraceptives, the population will grow, creating a bigger economic issue in the future.

If a woman and her family have inadequate preventative healthcare, to the point where symptoms are ignored because the cost of seeing a doctor, having tests, or buying medicine is too high, THAT's an economic issue. The nation's emergency room and clinics will be overwhelmed. The costs of major medical procedures can ruin families completely.

And that's just for starters. EVERY women's issue is an economic issue. And most women I know are getting very tired of having Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan dismiss women's issues as mere diversions.

Define Pro-Life

by muon

You'd think, regardless how far apart the factions of this country are on the abortion issue, there's one thing we all ought to be able to agree on. No matter when you believe life starts, or for that matter, when you believe life ends, we all ought to agree that in between the start and end, human beings are alive. Anyone out there have an issue with that? Speak up.

Today I heard a priest--one I like and respect--say that we needed to protect life "from the moment of conception until the moment of..." Knowing this priest, I expected him to say "...until the moment of death." He didn't. He said "...until the moment of birth." I was dumbfounded. What about the rest of life?

To me, anyone calling themselves pro-life ought to commit to an across-the-board definition. Otherwise, you're only anti-abortion. What about the moment after birth, when that new baby may need extraordinary measures to keep him alive? If the family has no health care insurance, will that baby, "protected" until the moment of birth end up dying because he had to be born at home with no medical personnel in attendance?

What about as that baby grows up? Will he have decent nutrition? Or will he develop malnutrition issues or childhood obesity, because his neighborhood is a junk food mecca and a fresh food desert? Will he fail to get an adequate education because his public school was taken over by a for-profit company? Will he be stuck in a cycle of poverty the rest of his "life?" Will he be seduced into illegal activities as the only way to survive, because he can't get a job without an education? Will he end up being "protected" in the prison system? Will he take possibly the one honorable option open to him, and join the military, possibly to die in a war that supports only the interests of multinational corporations? Will he survive that and return home instead physically or mentally disabled, perhaps with a shorter life expectancy and a burden to society? Assuming of course, that legislators leave the social programs in place that would allow him to "live" at all.  Will he have food and fuel and clothing and healthcare, and Social Security in his later years, to allow him to stay alive?

In my opinion, you've got no business going around puffing out your chest, claiming you're pro-life, unless you commit to it whole hog. If you want to define pro-life as anti-abortion, fine, but you'd better include anti-war, anti-death penalty, anti-poverty, anti-sickness, anti-ignorance, and anti-everything else that doesn't give each baby born a chance at a long, productive life. If you can commit to all these things, then I'm okay with your preaching to me about it from the pulpit. I may not agree with all your politics, but I'll feel you have a real respect for human life. Otherwise, don't tell me who to vote for. Come to think of it, don't tell me who to vote for either way.

This is why, this week, I'm supporting the Nuns On The Bus. They're a group of American Catholic sisters who are traveling from Des Moines to Washington, DC, trying to educate people about the plight of the poor in America. These days, we aren't talking about the poor as a tiny percentage of the population--half of the population earns less than $35,000 annually. The poverty level right now includes nearly a quarter of all Americans. The Nuns are bringing attention to Republican policies, and particularly the Paul Ryan budget, which would eliminate so many social programs that at least give poorer Americans a chance to survive past those "protected" months before birth.

The Nuns were told by the Catholic hierarchy to quit wasting all their time on the poor and instead, hop aboard the anti-abortion bandwagon. The sisters refused. They understand the meaning of pro-life.

Go sisters!

Disturbing Phenomenon

by Ruth A. Sheets

I have noticed a troubling phenomenon among my students. Several of my best readers hate reading and tell me that they only read if they have to and then, they try to get away with reading the least possible.  Many of my good math students hate math and do just enough to get the grade they can live with.

What is going on here?  Why should highly intelligent young people dislike or even hate what they do well?  One would think that a person would be proud of what they do well and would want to do it often. 

I have not been able to find anything related to the psychology of this, but it doesn’t seem to be present just in young people in a disadvantaged community.  Our nation seems to be doing the same thing. 

Our government is really good at some things:  Social programs including medical care and research, protecting the environment, keeping food safe, regulating businesses that could get carried away with greed and speculation, moving mail.

Instead of allowing the government to do what it does well, we are trying to convince ourselves that we hate the social programs and want to end protective regulations.  We are being overwhelmed with advertising to convince us that what we are actually doing well doesn’t work and must be scrapped. 

What would these be replaced with?  Privatization, a totally free market, trickle down economics and other programs which have not proven successful are repeatedly proposed.  Why? What are we thinking?  

My students’ struggles will be much greater because they do not value what they do well.  I suspect that our nation’s struggles, too, will be more difficult because we choose not to value and fight for our government and give it the resources to do what it does well.   

HEALTH CARE AND THE SUPREME COURT

by Ruth A. Sheets

So, President Obama has publicly stated his position on the upcoming Supreme Court decision concerning the health care plan.  The criticism of his statements is truly ridiculous and “much ado about nothing.”  Is it possible that the “right” has so little to complain about him lately that they are grabbing at straws.

Okay, enough with the cliches.  Mr. Obama is a Constitutional scholar and knows far more than his critics about what is and is not proper related to the Supreme Court.  He has the right of any citizen to remind the Court that they should not be partisan.   He knows that despite the conservative justices’ declaration that they despise “Activist Courts,” they, themselves have been as “Activist” as any recent Court:  declaring corporations to be persons and giving an election to a candidate who did not win despite voter fraud, among other decisions.

The health care law “Obamacare,” is challenging in many ways and whatever decision the Court comes to will be controversial.  According to polls, fewer than half of Americans asked said they did not like the law, but when asked about specific provisions, responded favorably.

Outside the Supreme Court building last week, people in both camps protested loudly.  On the one side, people cried “Health care for all!  The mandate means taking responsibility!”  The other side yelled, “We want freedom!  We want choice!”

Which of these arguments would carry the most weight with average Americans? 

None of the interviewers who spoke with the people in the crowds asked follow-up questions like “How do you think the mandate means taking responsibility?  What do you mean by freedom/choice?”

To me, the group demanding health care for all and people taking responsibility does to a great extent frame the issue and the reason the group was there.  Calling for “freedom” and “choice” says very little. 

Is this freedom to not have health insurance, yet expect to be cared for in the Emergency Room?

Is it freedom to have pre-existing conditions that are not covered for themselves or their family?

Is it freedom for insurance companies to refuse to cover expensive but necessary care?

One can’t help but wonder if the Supreme Court justices are considering these things.  As a nation, we commit to caring for one another.  For the first time in a long while, we have a chance to improve the quality of life for many Americans with minimal sacrifice.  I fear, as President Obama does that our unelected Supreme Court, for partisan reasons may destroy this opportunity.   

WHY DO CONSERVATIVES HATE “OBAMACARE?”

by Ruth A. Sheets

The Supreme Court will be hearing the case against “Obamacare” next week.  Representatives from 26 states want the whole program to be repealed.  It makes no sense, but the truth is that most of what Conservatives are proposing these days makes no sense.

The health care reform passed two years ago has so many positives that Conservatives should like. 

 - it requires a continuation of private health insurance

 - it provides relief for small business owners who will be able to obtain reasonable coverage for their workers, as well as the self-employed,  through insurance plan exchanges

 - it allows young people who are not yet employed to remain on their parents’ plans so they can receive health care while they are looking for work

 - it relieves hospitals so that they are not primary care for a huge number of uninsured Americans, costs they have to “eat.”

 - seniors can receive preventive care which can maintain a greater quality of life

 - every citizen will have the opportunity to take responsibility for their own health care and share costs across the whole population

 - people cannot be denied care due to pre-existing conditions or conditions that cost too much

Where is the down side?  It seems to me that everyone benefits.  Maybe that’s the problem.  In our form of “free market,” only the wealthiest are supposed to benefit.  It is hard for me to believe that all Conservatives are wealthy or even truly imagine that they will be.  Why would they want to vote against a program that would directly benefit most of them?  I suspect it is because their leaders have christened the program “Obamacare” and the first half of that title is what they are really against, no matter what the cost to themselves and their neighbors.

Our Government and Your Reproductive Health, or This Won't Hurt A Bit

This post is for women. All you fellas do us a favor and go find a blog about big screen TVs or football or something. This won't take long.

Ladies, imagine if you will a perfect world where a Congressional committee convenes to discuss men's reproductive health. It would, of course, be chaired by a woman. Only women would be allowed to testify.

The media would only interview women on the subject. No one in these news outlets would ever mention that drugs like Viagra are prescribed for actual, sometimes serious, medical disorders. Reporters would seek out Catholic nuns and the ex-wives of political candidates to ask if we shouldn't simply go with God's will on the subject.

Men? Are you still reading this? Hmm. You're worried that such a committee's recommendations might make you hold your knees together in the manner approved by the Santorum campaign for birth control? Perhaps you're worried that aspirin might not be an adequate pain killer?

Nonsense. After all, women know what's best for you.

muon

COMPROMISE CAN WORK?

by Ruth A. Sheets

Well, it’s happened again, or has it?  President Obama seems to have “folded” in the face of the PR campaign by the Roman Catholic bishops.  They whined and complained that their religious freedom would be limited if Catholic employers had to cover contraception services for women working for them. 

In reality, President Obama decided to let them have their way requiring only that insurance companies cover the services for any woman in religion-related organizations who want contraception.  Before I realized this was a true compromise,  I thought President Obama had collapsed again under the Right’s onslaught.

On “The News Hour,” I heard Kathleen Sebelius, the Secretary of Health and Human Services explain the decision.  She said that insurance companies are willing to cover contraception services because for women who use these services, the total cost of medical care decreases significantly, up to 15%. 

This sounds like a good deal for everyone involved.  All women who want coverage even if they work for a church-based organization which employs folks of other faiths can get it, a “good” compromise!

However, hints of rejection on the part of the Roman Catholic command are spreading.  It seems that unless they get exactly what they want, they will keep fighting.  It makes no sense unless one realizes that the Roman Catholic battle is really against women who might want to make their own decisions about life and birth.  It is presented under the guise of “Religious Freedom.”

The bishops and their Right-Wing supporters cry “Religious freedom!” yet, they can’t seem to imagine that others’ desire for that same religious freedom is just as valid. 

For example, a majority of  Americans have come to understand that same sex marriage will not destroy marriage or even impact their own lives in any way.  Many believe that people’s gender preferences are God’s will or gift.  However, right-wing religious groups still pour resources into fighting the right of gay couples to marry.  What about the religious freedom of gay Americans and their supporters?

For another example, many people, like me, believe that life begins when a fetus can live outside the mother’s womb with a minimum of technological support.  We believe that God has given women their own bodies for which they   are responsible.  Choosing abortion is an option for women who cannot bear a child, do not want to have a child at the time of their pregnancy, or need to terminate the pregnancy due to rape, incest, the woman’s health, or severe disability of the fetus.

The Religious Right is doing everything to limit the religious freedom of the people who believe as I do.  They are making abortion very difficult to get and for poor women, almost impossible to afford. 

The hypocrisy is highly evident, yet, the media covers the bishops’ cry for religious freedom as though it has more validity than the religious argument for abortion or same-sex marriage.  The only way this makes sense is if this is not a religious freedom issue at all, but a way of establishing religion in America, )which as the Right so often tells us, is against the Constitution).

Maybe instead of continuing to fight contraception, the best thing for the Roman Catholic bishops and their followers to do would  be to spend their time and resources on taking care of their flock.  They could better use their money to keep more Catholic schools open in poor neighborhoods, provide more services for the children who are “rescued” from abortion.  They could spend pulpit time helping their members to be more loving and accepting of people whose beliefs and opinions are different from their own.

I know, I know!  Dream on!  As I mentioned earlier, this is not really about  religion.  It is about women getting too uppity and it’s about power and what the power of the Church can do to influence life in America.  President Obama needs to be aware that no matter what compromise he makes with the Roman bishops, he cannot win unless he tows the line with them and knuckles under to their demands, all the time on every issue.

Since he cannot do that, he should make a reasonable attempt to meet them on ground that won’t put non-Catholics at risk, then stand firm.  On this issue, he has done the former.  Now we’ll see if he can do the latter and remain strong.

FREEDOM OF RELIGION?

by Ruth A. Sheets

This past week, the Obama administration took a bold step, not as common an occurrence as I would like, but certainly welcome at this time. All private insurance companies will be required to cover contraception for women, no co-pays, no denials of service. This includes religion-based institutions who serve and employ people not of that particular faith.

Most people, when polled, thought that women should have access to free contraception.  As of August, even working-class women will be able to plan their family size and decide when and whether they will become pregnant.  An added bonus is that the number of abortions and unwanted children will decrease significantly.

This sounds like a win-win scenario, don’t you think!  Even the right-wing conservatives should find something here to love.

Not so fast!  The Roman Catholic clergy are vowing to stop this service from being implemented in all facilities that are in any way associated with the Church.  It doesn’t matter if the person to be covered by the insurance is not herself Roman Catholic.  The Bishops’ argument is that this is a matter of freedom of religion. 

This is fascinating!  The Roman Catholic Bishops don’t seem to have a problem interfering with everyone else’s freedom of religion as they campaign against abortion and contraception despite the fact that many religious people do not agree with their stance.  They even want to criminalize it, calling women murderers.  In Pennsylvania, the bishops support the bill that is before the Assembly that forces women to have an ultrasound which they must watch, before they can have an abortion.

I guess that religious freedom only counts when the clergy get to force women to follow their archaic world view.  If one’s faith allows for a more progressive understanding, too bad. 

Does President Obama’s position on this matter mean he “hates” the Roman Catholic Church as implied by some commentators?  No, of course not, but the bishops are highly skilled at using inflammatory rhetoric.  They will vilify the current administration in the Church’s campaign against women, a centuries old effort. 

In the Roman Catholic scheme, women cannot win.  They are to submit to their husbands and the Church.  If they get pregnant, that must be God’s will.  If they are too poor to raise a child, that’s their fault.  According to the Church hierarchy, all male, of course, pregnancy is perfection for women and choosing not to be pregnant is a sin, unless a women has chosen a chaste life.

What I don’t get is the number of women who go along with this  nonsense.  Is it their penance for some imagined sin?  If the women left the Church en masse until some real changes on behalf of women were made, it wouldn’t take too long.  Women hold the Roman Catholic Church  together, just as they do most denominations, no matter what those in charge think.

I hope President Obama and his Secretary of Health and Human Services will stand their ground.  Maybe that will keep the bishops distracted long enough to allow progressives to reverse the Medieval abortion laws springing up all over the country.

WHAT HAVE REPUBLICANS DONE FOR US?

by Ruth A. Sheets

 Lately I hear Republican candidates claiming that they want to “take or win America back.”  They seem to want to return our nation to some mythical time when things were better.  I can’t help but wonder, better for whom.

I have been trying to think of one thing the Republicans have done for America and Americans that was positive and did not primarily serve the wealthiest few.  I considered contributions by Republicans to American society since 1980.  Here are some important categories that touch the lives of most Americans

Education:  Republican education reformers came up with vouchers which take tax payer money and give it to private and religious schools while neglecting the public schools as much as possible. Charter schools were introduced, a vehicle for giving public money to private companies and individuals to provide educational services, whether or not those people or companies are competent. 

Health care:  Republicans tore down every attempt to introduce programs that could assure each American of affordable medical services.  They convinced many Americans that “Obamacare/socialized medicine” would be terrible for Americans when what they meant was it would be terrible for the wealthy medical insurance companies who sponsor their campaigns.  Even extending insurance to poor children involved a fight.

Jobs:  Republicans say they create jobs, but they are not too interested in the quality of those jobs and whether or not those jobs provide a living wage.  They work constantly to break unions and to fight raising the minimum wage.  Most Republicans bearly blink when a presidential candidate tells poor people that their kids should be hired as janitors so they can learn to “show up on Monday.” 

Family Values:  Republicans would have us believe that they have a lock on what it means to be family while they ignore their own principles.  It is OK, though since they ask forgiveness after they are caught and are immediately assumed to be repentant.  They speak of the sacredness of marriage while not honoring it very well themselves.  Many Republicans want to prohibit use of all birth control as well as abortion but do not provide assistance after the baby is born.  Their position should be called “Right to Birth,” not “Right to life.”  It is not sufficient that they choose not to use these family planning techniques themselves, they need to dictate what everyone else is allowed to do.

Government Programs:  Republicans don’t want to have Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, Social Security or other Government programs, yet these are often the only safety nets that stand between citizens and disaster.  They do not create better programs, they just put barriers in front of people who need them.

  

Size of Government:  Republicans claim Government is too large, but under every Republican administration, it grew significantly, particularly in the area of defense.  Growth is good as long as the right people benefit from it.

Environment:  I won’t even begin to address environmental issues. In Republican eyes, environmental regulations just get in the way of people making money, no matter the destruction that results.

.

So, what do Republicans have to offer America this year?  It is certainly not going to be anything that will benefit average Americans.  If the past is any indication, and Republicans gain any more power, we are all in for a rough time, except maybe the one percent.

THE EASY CAUSE

 Thursday morning, I was listening to a report on NPR about the flocking of Republican candidates to the “Right to Life” convention in Florida.  It seems that they are falling over themselves to prove that they are the most anti-abortion candidate ever.  They are even signing pledges that if elected, they will only appoint “right to life” people to positions of power in their administration. 

As I listened to the report, it came to me as it so often does that abortion is the easy cause.  All you have to do to have credentials in their group is be willing to show photos magnified a hundred times of aborted fetuses and work to cut funding for any organization that tries to help women who cannot or should not be pregnant.  Usually the spokeswomen have a bunch of kids and claim to be super religious. The men aren’t too big on women’s rights in general.

If these people are so “right to life,” where is the signed pledge that they will find funding for struggling women and children?  Where did they sign that they will do whatever necessary to be sure that even the poorest children will have an education equal to that of at least middle class kids?  Where is their signature on the promise to get businesses into poor communities that will provide jobs for the young people and prices that residents can afford?  Where are the ads and quality films that promote giving children for adoption?  I don’t see the pen on the line promising health care for all children or decent housing for their families.

What I do see is a stampede toward a cause that has all kinds of emotional ties but few real risks.  Their efforts make a small core of people think that being anti-abortion says something important about their candidate’s character.  It is not even necessary to analyze what that is.  With one hand the candidates sign a ridiculous, probably un-American pledge while they raise the other to cut spending for the programs that would support and protect the children.  It seems the group’s name should be “Right to Birth” with a subtext that states, "Every breath you take after birth is at your own risk."

Peace,

Ruth