“Death Panels” Make a Comeback – We are Better Off with Them

So here we go again. The government, in trying to make some actual progress, is being hobbled by the potential negative influence of media outlets (namely, Fox News) and groups like the John Birch Society.

Appears as though the Obama Administration is trying to enact regulations in 2011 which will allow doctors and patients to engage in critical discussions regarding end-of-life decisions. The regulations will provide Medicare compensation to support these discussions, and the administration is taking the principled stand that these discussions are important.

However, according to one story, supporters of this move are trying to keep it somewhat quiet because they fear they will stoke the flames that raged when Mr. Obama tried to get this compensation into the health care legislation passed in 2009. What happened in 2009? Based on an initial statement by Sarah Palin and the immediate support she received, opponents of the health care law began to suggest that Mr. Obama and his “socialists” were trying to convene “death panels” which would decide who lives and who dies. Despite the fact that even Senator Grassley – no fan of Mr. Obama – admitted that such a concept was not part of the legislation (see video here), the rumors persisted. Mr. Obama had no choice but to remove this vital service from the legislation. Knowing what is right, however, has compelled the administration to execute a regulation that our legislators did not have the moxie to enact.

So why are supporters of the new regulations trying to fly under the radar on this?

Discussions like this or like this, on the so-called Fair-and-Balanced Fox News, will continue to distort the truth and confuse the people with the term “death panel.” Those same media outlets and related conservative organizations (and their puppet politicians) will continue to sow the insinuation that somehow the government will compel people to literally make choices between life and death. So much for reasoned and honorable debate.

My mom died on January 27, 2010. Her passing was certainly a very emotional event and a part of my life that I will never forget. Of course, you never forget the passing of your parent, and that is because it is traumatic, emotional and so final. All of the things she did for me come back in my memory and I realize (too late?) what a great influence she was on my development and progress in life. However, in this case, my mom’s passing was made more palatable by the fact that we (as a family) had discussed end-of-life options long before the final moment. In fact, between my parents, their doctors, and all of my siblings, we had a pretty good handle on my mom’s wishes, the medical options, and the alternative choices. Bottom line – we were well-informed.

That – in its essence – is what the Obama administration is trying to provide….a well-informed medical community and client population. We should all have the “luxury” of being able to walk through very gut-wrenching decisions and end-of-life discussions with this full knowledge and understanding. Such knowledge and understanding should be covered by medical insurance, whether Medicare, Medicaid or the best private insurance in the world. If we cannot have those discussions, or they can only be had by the ones who can afford them, we are doing a significant disservice to our human population and the values that hold this country together.

AMENDED Jan 5: unfortunately, politics, administrative process and an unwillingness of the Obama administration to stand up to the Republicans has pulled this regulation from the Medicare books. Too bad, really too bad. See here.

Obama’s Gamble Pays Off on Arms Control Treaty

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a great story – it shows that President Obama can set a course, develop a plan, and make it happen. The “Yes We Can” mantra is alive and well, and Mr. Obama is showing that he CAN work across the aisle, get Republicans to join him, and do it despite some resistance from members of his own party. The more we hear about Senator Reid, the less impressed I am. Since I was never that impressed to begin, then his stock is VERY low in my portfolio. On the other hand, former Senators Clinton and Biden, in their new roles in the administration, have shown that they can be worthy partners with the president – and they have the ability to pull some levers as well to make it happen. Nice job, team!

Obama’s Gamble Pays Off on Arms Control Treaty – NYTimes.com.

Senate Advances Arms Treaty, 67-28

 

 

Good news! The Senate shows us that reasonable heads can prevail and that not all Republicans are out to get Obama. Maybe we cannot trust the Russians, but this treaty should allow us to keep a closer eye on nuclear weapons. We are safer because of it and because of the Democrats.

Senate Advances Arms Treaty, 67-28 – NYTimes.com.

Political Justice?

This happened on Friday, December 10, 2010, not in 1999….

 

 

 

Take Four Minutes and Become Smarter

Anyone who has children knows that education is critically important, but we also know that – even in the best of schools – helping our children understand the world around us is a significant challenge given all of the distractions that exist. Students need to understand math, science, history, global geography, literature – just to name a few. But on a daily basis, iPhones, iPads, Facebook, Google, YouTube have a tendency to get in the way – and that’s not even talking about the age-old issues of bullying, peer pressure, etc. Our schools need to teach the same information in new and different and exciting ways, and we need enthusiastic teachers to do it.

Technology has long provided an opportunity to accelerate learning, make it more personal, and do it in a way that fascinates the student. But too often it is the technology that gets in the way. But here is a difference. This clip shows us what can be done when an enthusiastic teacher merges cool technology with statistics and history to produce a truly teachable moment. Granted, your average high school teacher does not have access to the resources to create this sort of educational tool, but the resources exist to create it for them.

Give it a watch…200 countries across 200 years…all it takes is four minutes to generate discussions on everything from colonization, the Industrial Revolution and World Wars I and II, to the rise of Asia, the spread of AIDS, the damages of influenza…and on and on and on…enjoy!

Meet The Press, Dec 5: McConnell, Kerry

This was a great show. David Gregory is becoming a great influence, despite what Senator McConnell said on the show:  Meet The Press: McConnell, Kerry, roundtable.

Possible New Path to Bipartisan Agreements??

So, do we call it a compromise? Smart politics? Waffle? Sell-out? Cave-in? Breaking a campaign promise? Either way, it is a tough set of decisions for President Obama. Granted, he secured lower taxes for all of the people he wanted, he secured continued assistance to the unfortunate folks without jobs, and he made a deal on payroll taxes that will benefit many (including this writer). But was this the right deal for the country, for the people and for the Democrats? Not sure. In this age of deficit reduction and economic uncertainty, keeping the taxes the same for everyone and cutting payroll taxes was probably a bridge too far – the deal will mean another $900 B added to the debt just like that. The compromise to get this bill crafted feels too much like a thumping. As I stated earlier in a comment, President Obama should have threatened a veto and let the government ground to a halt in the name of standing up to key values, such as equity. How much have the truly wealthy compromised in the last two years?

As the article suggests, will this be a pattern? Let’s hope not.

Possible New Path to Bipartisan Agreements – NYTimes.com.

Amended 12/13 – In retrospect, this was a pretty good step by Mr. Obama. The tax bill is a major compromise for the president, but he really needed to go this route in the face of Republican opposition. Besides, Republicans wanted permanent extensions of the wealthy, and they did not get it. Of course, we will see in 2012. The key for Mr. Obama is to make sure he stays in the driver’s seat rather than continually reacting to what the Republicans want. With ownership of the WH and the Senate, he should be able to do this.

A Positive Perspective on Wikileaks and American Diplomacy

Message? Our diplomats are smart and working hard. That’s a good thing because the world needs it! We may not always be positive influences, but our current administration is on the right track.

NYTimes: From WikiLemons, Clinton Tries to Make Lemonade http://nyti.ms/fMn5U3

See commentary from Fareed Zakaria on this topic: http://m.cnn.com/primary/_uxtUny-idjLdz6DDo

The Obama Inheritance – The Bush Years Just Keep on Giving

Would you accept an inheritance today that would cripple you with taxes and debt next year? Or an inheritance that would constantly remind you about how bad things can get? Depends, I suppose, on your view of the ultimate value of that inheritance, but you would certainly not relish the idea. Any hesitation in accepting the inheritance would be understandable especially if those around you sought your failure to successfully re-invest the inheritance.

Such is Obama’s dilemma. This is not new news….it was clear in January 2009 (and before) that Mr. Obama was taking on a significant challenge. Any number of news articles articulated this challenge, and books were hot off the presses which enumerated the effort that would be required to turn things around. George W. Bush left President Obama a mess – the economy, Iraq, Afghanistan, the budget, foreign policy…the list goes on.

But what is different in late 2010, now that Mr. Obama has had almost two years to fix things? If you focused your attention on the newsstands only, you would think that nothing has improved. The debt and deficits are out of control. Unemployment is still too high. We are struggling in terms of a respected foreign policy. We cannot even win the Olympics or the World Cup. Certainly there are positive highlights out there; the economy appears to be – ever so slowly – turning around, GM has re-issued its stock, Iraq is moving in the right direction, Afghanistan is still a possible success, health care is improving, etc.

However, what is really most notable is that – despite the challenges confronted, and Mr. Obama’s vigorous response to them – he really has very little chance to succeed. The very politicians who bequeathed him the American inheritance in the first place are the same people who are making it difficult for him to make the necessary improvements. Imagine that? The Republicans gave Mr. Obama a declining inheritance, but they actively are preventing Mr. Obama from taking the necessary steps to make the inheritance worthwhile. So, the giver continues to give!

The Bush inheritance has given Mr. Obama a United States of lower stature around the world, and yet the Republicans claim that the President is wrong to qualify “American exceptionalism.” Why must we say we are better than everyone else? It is time to realize that we are part of a broader and inter-connected world. Listen to the Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao.

The Bush inheritance has given Mr. Obama the worst deficits and debt in American history, and yet the Republicans are whining that the President is trying to “cut” the taxes of the upper-middle class in this country, the people who supposedly drive American growth. If taxes were the substantial engine that drove growth, then how is it that we lost so many jobs in the last five years with those taxes so low?? Give me and the rest of America a break. Make some economically conservative choices. Otherwise get the hell out of the way so that we can start to make tough choices.

The Bush inheritance gave Mr. Obama Iraq and Afghanistan, and yet the Republicans use Mr. Obama’s tough decisions in these arenas as a platform from which to question his moxie and commitment to US armed forces. Let the guy lead. Let him listen to the military. He is C-in-C. Deal with it.

Mr. Boehner, McConnell and the rest of you…..the country is a mess. Mr. Obama inherited the mess. He did not create it. Work with him to fix it or get out of the way. But, then again, that’s your plan, isn’t it? Use the very inheritance to bring him down – and let the Bush gift just keep on giving.

Pentagon Finds Little Risk in ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Repeal

I am not the most qualified person to comment on this, but the survey numbers do not lie. The closest I ever got to serving in the military was sitting in a Marine recruiting office in Philadelphia in 1986 just about to sign a commitment. The commitment would have put me in boot camp in the summer of 1986 and made me a Marine for some years after college, but I guess I was simply not ready to give up my summers. I had a great summer job and I enjoyed the weather. Selfish for sure. It is one of the decisions I regret in life. The Marines wanted me in their group and I rejected them. My loss.

That said, as the news reports articulate, internal military surveys suggest that the issue about gays serving in the military has no negative impact on morale and operations. I would not demand that this means the military should change their policies, but the military should think about it.

But what is most interesting about this debate is that we hear so many Republicans arguing against the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” They use the same arguments against the repeal as they used against the creation of the policy in the first place….a policy put in place by President Clinton in the 1990s. They argue that any policy like this would crush military discipline and compromise the trenches. Same thing they said when Truman wanted to integrate the Armed Forces in the late 1940s even after African-Americans served valiantly in World War II.

There may be legitimate reasons for setting certain military policies, but – oh Republicans – please do not continue to show a lack of creativity in your arguments! Let those who want to serve put their best foot forward for this country. I did not do it, but we should allow others to do it.