health care

by

Unforeseen Positive Effects of COVID-19


COVID-19 has interrupted our normal activities in ways no one could have seen. One of our most sacred institutions, church/temple/mosque, have closed leaving us to finding a service on-line or just relying upon our experience with our particular faith. Many people have been told to not leave their homes, which, except for bad snowstorms and hurricanes, you never see.

Americans are indeed freaked out about COVID-19. They have raided food stores the likes of which has never been seen in the U.S. And some of their favorite haunts have either been closed by order of the city or because the business’s owner simply cannot afford to support a small number of people using his services.

My wife, who works as the bursar for one of Boston’s major educational institutions, has been working from home for over a week now. And this work from home has reached into many businesses, who formally did not use telecommuting or used it sparingly, to have most of their workforce telecommute.

I have been working in public education for over 10 years now in the k-12 public schools. These schools have slowly been computerizing and now most, at least in my area, use something called “Google Classroom” regularly for their students. Teachers can transmit assignments and have them turned in via this method. But it has also shown the shortcoming in this type of education. Students can ask questions via email but this method can be very slow. What needs to happen, and maybe some school districts are figuring out, is how to have students join in on a teleconference. I have no doubt this will be accomplish, necessity always precedes invention.

Nationally, we are seeing how a disease that was literally on the opposite side of the globe can quickly find its way to our shores and spread at an unnerving speed. The shortcoming of our health system have become painfully obvious. Most, if not all, hospitals are simply not prepared for a pandemic. But they are learning what they need to do. Worse, our country fell flat on its face in having enough test kits and test facilities for those who are possibly or probably infected. That too is changing and is likely to remain changed.

But in that realm of public health there is one aspect for which we do not, yet, have a response. When the health providers themselves become sick and shortages of personnel arises, what then? There simply are not enough trained technicians to handle a large influx of people requiring respirators and someone to monitor them. I suspect this shortfall will be covered by cross educating other technicians in this field.

The most important thing COVID-19 has done for us is to make visible all our shortcomings and is forcing us to address them. This virus will pass into history eventually, they always do, but when this particular one does we will have a host of new data that should forever improve our health system, our food distribution systems, our working situations, and many other areas. And that is always a good thing.

by

A New American Polical Party: The Moderate Party


 

This country has been a two party nation since Thomas Jefferson ran for president.   He called himself a Democratic Republican in opposition to the Federalists and John Adams in particular who he ran against. Since then we have always had two major political parties. Since 1858 it has been Democrats and Republicans. Prior to the present day Republicans there was the Whig party.

I am personally tired of the self-serving rhetoric coming out of both parties. Each party has its own fringe although the Republicans seem a bit splintered. The Tea Party of today is just a reincarnation of the Moral Majority of 20 years ago. The wrapping is different but the message is the same; they will settle for nothing less than a Christian nation.

I am hereby inaugurating the Moderate Party. It is my belief that such a party will actually represent the general views of well over 50% of the people of this nation at any given moment. We will take what we believe to be the best of both parties and embrace them. We will as political aspirants sign a pledge to never take a single penny from any PAC. We will listen to those PACs but we will never compromise ourselves by taking money from them to support our election.

Today’s Moderate Party will neither embrace the socialist views of Sen. Bernie Sanders nor the Xenophobic racist views of Donald Trump.   We will not make campaign promises of going to war in any part of this world as a solution to regional or world problems. We will look for ways to reduce the tax burden on the middle class. We will end federal subsidies to otherwise profitable corporation. We will tighten the tax laws to close all loopholes available only to the rich or to large corporations.   We will impose a minimum tax rate on all persons and corporations that realize a certain level of income after reasonable expenses have been accounted for. We will vigorously support the second amendment while putting into place gun laws which afford the general public a reasonable feeling that all guns are being sold only to those who have photo IDs showing themselves as legitimate buyers and they will not be kept from buying any gun they desire to include assault weapons. We will also require all gun dealers to be federally licensed and be required to complete a simple background check on all customers. They will be required to keep extremely accurate records of all gun sales.

At the start we will neither support nor withhold support for abortion or the death penalty. The position of each will be decided by a caucus of representatives of all 50 states and 4 territories.

We will look for ways to reduce the size of our government without eliminating existing services. For example, all parts of the Department of Homeland Security can be folded into the Department of Defense. And where it is necessary for such jobs as airport security come into play, those jobs will be held by the military police of the Army, Navy, and Air Force however their will wear a non-traditional military uniform. These men and women will be entirely made up of reservists and national guardsmen. The Veterans Administration will be transferred to the Department of Defense and all veterans with an honorable military discharge will be able to avail themselves of the medical services on any military installation. Veterans educational programs will become an extension of civilian oriented military training.

We will re-write the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) so that access to it and what it offers will be close to what Americans who are part of group plans can expect. We will also require all insurance companies offer health benefits under this act or be sanctioned.

normal67

What you see above is what is referred to as a standard bell curve. The way to read it is simple. Look at the straight line at the bottom. The -3 to +3 represents an entire population, of anything, but in this case I am using it for American citizens. The points between -0.5 and +0.5 are where you will find the position most Americans on any given subject. I believe that we can actually extend this between -1 and +1. The slope of the curve represents how strongly people feel in one direction or another about any particular subject. It is my belief that the 68% represented by these two points is where you can find most Americans and their willingness to work together. The remaining 16% on each side are those so deeply entrenched in an idea that you would be hard pressed to get them to change.

This bell curve is extremely important right now because it is my belief that the beleaguered Republican Party is being ruled by the 16% on their side of the curve. To be certain, many of Bernie Sanders’ ideas lie well within the 16% of the Democrat side and are simply not palatable to the other 84% of Americans, regardless of how hard he pushes.

I believe 68% of Americans are not interested in any particular groups religious beliefs, gun beliefs, money making beliefs or philosophical beliefs. They hold and want recognized their reasonable and moderate view of the world, the United States, and the town the live in to be respected. This is something that is not now happening.

I only wish I had the resources available to start such a party because I would. As a registered Democrat I embrace certain Republican views and find that among my Republican friends, we generally agree on most things. This, to me, epitomizes what the Moderate Party represents.

by

A Few Things I Do Not Understand and Need Explained


Health Care Reform a.k.a. Obamacare — Under the new health care reform, millions of Americans will be sending many more millions of dollars to private insurance carriers to cover their health care costs.  How does a new revenue source for private companies hurt America?  How will it ruin our health care system, as claimed?

Reducing the Size of the Military — Democrats think we spend too much money at the Department of Defense and say a smaller military is the answer.  Why is it I do not feel equally as safe under that plan as I do now?  How does that improve our national defense posture?  Republicans claim it is just a leaner more efficient fighting force.  How?

Reducing Taxes — Mitt Romney says he will reduce taxes on the middle class by 20%.  How is that going to work considering our increasing national debt?  He has not proposed reducing the size of government which is where all that money goes.  This is like saying, “I can afford the monthly payments on my Rolls Royce even though I only earn $20,ooo a year.  Believe me!”

Pro-Choice vs. Pro-Life — Why are we still trying to legislate morality?

Death Penalty vs. None — In this case, why are “pro-lifers” in favor of killing people?  Isn’t that just a bit inconsistent?

Ending Federal Funding for Public Television — Is Sesame Street really just a liberal thing or do all children benefit from it?  What left-wing ideas are Antiques Road Show, Nova, American Experience, etc. promoting?

Subsidizing Oil Companies — Really?  How do you justify that?  I really don’t get it.

Subsidizing Corporate Owned Farms — Same as above, really?  I mean, really?

Government Ethics — Every non-politically appointed government employee must adhere to a strict code of ethics.  Why are politicians exempt?  In reality, should we not expect the Secretary of Defense to adhere more tightly to ethical behavior than his office manager, or his office manager’s secretary?

Public Education — Why do we expect our students in public schools to get the same level of education when the per student cost of education is four times higher in the private sector than the public?  How will vouchers fix that? (The average cost per student in the public schools is a little over $5000 while at a private school it is over $20,000)  How are our public schools repairable when we are not willing to pay for the level of education we want?

Regulating Wall Street — If Wall Streeters are a bunch of foxes, and we are the chickens, who is supposed to protect us from the foxes if there are no regulations and therefore no regulation enforcers?  Don’t foxes love to eat chickens?

Too Big to Fail — Republicans constantly avow free market ideals.  But is not one of those ideals allowing for corporate failure when the corporate entity becomes inefficient and/or corrupt?

The Liberal Press — If the liberal press is so powerful, so persuasive, how did Bush become President?  How does any Republican ever win in those states dominated by the liberal press?  Is it possible the “liberal press” is largely a myth?

Patriotism — Are Republicans and conservatives naturally more patriotic than Democrats and liberals, or is that just another myth?

Who Can Come to America — Imigration quotas, by nationality, were set in 1922 based on 1900 data.  Why are we still using that data to decide who can emigrate?

Feel free to add to this list.

by

Should the Government Require People to Buy Health Insurance?


Here in Massachusetts it is already law, yes, you must buy health insurance.  On Massachusetts tax forms you must certify that you have health insurance and provide proof.  If you do not, there is a penalty you must pay.  But is this a good thing?  Is it a legal thing under our Constitution?  Those are the very questions the US Supreme Judicial Court is considering right now.

Republican Governor Mitt Romney was responsible for bringing this law into effect in Massachusetts.  The Democrats since Pres. Obama has been in office have made it their priority to get health care to everyone while the Republicans have been four square against it.  But should the U.S. have a law that requires all American buy health insurance?  That is the question before all of us right now, and it seems a majority of Americans are against this requirement as it now stands.

I have heard that upwards to 40% of all Americans are not covered by health insurance.  But when they get sick, hospitals are required to treat them.  Doctors cannot turn a patient away for lack of health insurance.  Even more, hospitals and doctors supply medication and other items generally covered by health insurance.  These costs are picked up by those of us who have health insurance.

I have always had health insurance.  Even though I am retired I still have health insurance as a part of my retirement plan.  I do, however, still have to pay 50% of the premium but I consider that insignificant when I think of what life would be like without health insurance.  Actually, I do not want to have to think about such a thing but millions of American do have to think of exactly that.  Some, upon retiring, lose company supplied health insurance.  I suspect such people put off retirement for as long as possible.

This particular portion of President Obama’s health care plan is tricky.  It is reasonable for us to expect the 25-year-old who is employed by a company that supplies health insurance to buy it, but he has no requirement to do so.  That means when he is sick or injured he has a right to “free” care at a hospital.  But his bill is paid by those of us who have insurance in our premiums.  But should we require self-employed people and small companies to buy health insurance?  Do we do this to make it fair for the rest of us who do buy insurance and pay the sometimes pricey premiums?

Well, I cannot in good conscience, my Democrat Party leanings not-withstanding, go along with a law that requires someone to buy insurance.  I think it goes against the basics of a free society.  I do believe, however, that affordable healthcare in the form of insurance, is a right the every person in a free society should have.  Right now that is not true.  Regardless, it is my belief that the US SJC is going to declare this part of the health care bill as being unconstitutional, and it should be.

This should bring into focus for the Republican party the absolute necessity for a comprehensive health care plan that covers all Americans without penalizing any portion of Americans as is now true.  Maybe that means hospitals and doctors can turn away anyone who does not have insurance?  That would at least be fair.  Or maybe it means if you are on some sort of public assistance you must be given free care while everyone else must pay?  You see, that is the problem!  How do you resolve getting health care to those currently not covered by insurance without penalizing those who are covered.  The Democrats solution of throwing a lot of money at it or requiring everyone to get health insurance is not the solution.  But the Republican idea of ignoring it altogether, and offering no solution what-so-ever is equally as unacceptable.

We are supposed to be a very intelligent nation.  We are, in fact the richest nation in the world.  But then we are ranked only 37th in healthcare by the World Health Organization.  What this says is that the Democrats have the right idea but the wrong solution and the Republicans need to join the Democrats in finding a solution to this problem even as they, properly, object to the law as it is.  The only moral high ground here is that which includes a solution to this long-standing problem.  Nothing short of that is acceptable.

 

by

Health Care


I like to keep my blog as non-political as I can but this is something that really bothers me.  I also want to say that I am apolitical.  That is, I really do not like U.S. politics as proffered by either major political party today.  I think they are grossly out of touch with the average American and that both parties play on the fears of the average American.  I am prefacing this that way because this posting will have a more liberal bent to it but I want it to be clear, I do not trust the Democrats any  more than I do the Republicans.

The South Carolina Republican primary is today.  I have seen on news reports a lot of Republicans are pushing for the repeal of the latest health care reform, or as they euphemistically call it, Obamacare.  So here is what I do not get.  Why?  This bill has cost the average American absolutely nothing.  Taxes did not go up because of it.  No one who already has health care was required to change a thing.  The only thing it has done so far is open up health insurance to many who did not have it.  I realize that in another year it is going to require it of all Americans but why is that a bad thing?

We have had mandatory health care here in Massachusetts for a number of years now.  I have always had health insurance so it did not affect me in any way.  Massachusetts set up what is called Mass Health.  It is a system where those who were uncovered can go and buy health insurance at an affordable rate.  The effect, of course, is that people who were formally wont to visit a doctor or get proper medication, can do so now without fear of financial distress.  Doctors and hospitals like it better because now they do not have to write off nearly so many unpaid bills, many of those formerly for people living in poverty.

Why then, would any sane person want to block any American access to health insurance?  This is not a socialist move, as many have stated.  It is a move to help upwards to a third of our uninsured public get better health care.  Even worse, the Republican party has offered absolutely no alternative.  Had they said, for example, they favored a free clinic program, whereby the government invested in setting up and funding such clinics around the U.S., that would be an alternate.  But they have simply said no, we do not want all Americans to have equal access to what is billed as the world’s best health care system already.  And just to put a little perspective on that, the United States is currently ranked 36th by the World Health Organization in its health care.  We are behind a bunch of 3rd world countries.  What does that say about us?  The richest nation in the world, number 1, is only 36th in a very important statistic?  That is both unconscionable and unacceptable.

During the FDR administration it was recognized that too many Americans lacked certain basic needs, electricity and a retirement plan.  Both were resolved and are in place today.  Why then is a basic right to good health care a problem?  It should not be.  It is time for the Republican party to get off the dime, and if they do not care for Health Care Reform as it is, which they say they do not, then it is their responsibility to offer an alternative that creates the same result.