May 2007
HEALTH CARE – Our health care system is essentially broken. Just short of 50 million Americans do not have health coverage and 80% of them live in working families. Businesses in America are often forced to choose between providing health benefits or providing jobs.
The interesting thing is that the solution is obvious: a national health insurance program that is available to everyone. The difficulty in implementing such an obvious solution lies in two cultural traits that work against it. On the one hand there is an ideological perspective, unsupported by reality, that private insurance is always more efficient than public insurance. On the other hand, there is also an ethnocentric pride that leads us to falsely believe that we cannot learn from the experiences of other countries.
In response to those American traits, it is good to reflect on the facts that Canada, Germany, and Great Britain spend about half per person of what Americans do and yet we have lower life expectancy and higher infant mortality than any of these countries. In addition, our service to the sick is no better, and worse on some measures.
Some experts suggest that this sorry state of affairs is due in part to the fact that our culture defines access to health care as a privilege instead of a right. This is an unethical and immoral attitude that also turns out to be cruel and inefficient. Because of this “privilege” definition, our system is far more bureaucratic, which brings about much higher administrative costs than those of other countries. Many of these costs are entailed because private insurers and other related participants work hard at trying not to pay for medical care. Add to that the fact that our political system will not allow us to bargain with drug companies and other suppliers for lower prices. It is simply wrong that so many who work hard, pay their share of taxes, and play by the cultural rules, go, nonetheless, without decent health care or finally find themselves driven into economic hardship because of health cost.
The ethical, moral, and economic cases for health care reform in America are so easily made and based on overwhelming evidence. Many have been talking about reform of the health care system for years. With the 2008 elections accelerating before us and the presidential candidates already debating this and other issues, our
hope is that all of us working together will help to accelerate and reframe a renewed national debate about how to build a better American health care system. It will take all of our efforts to finally embolden political leaders to act – and act soon. Hopefully, one of these days we'll realize that our mostly privatized system isn't only unfair and unjust, it's much less efficient than a uncomplicated system of guaranteed health insurance.
November 20, 2006
IMPEACHMENT! The word stirs many emotions among people these days. The 2006 midterm elections are over and the rhetoric about impeachment continues to increase. The October 24, 2006 NEWSWEEK magazine shared their recent poll that showed 51% of the respondents of both political parties favored pursuing the impeachment of President Bush. Here, briefly, is what our US Constitution says about the process of impeachment:
Article II, Sec. 4 states that: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."
Article I, Section 2 states that: "The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment."
Article I, Section 3 states that: “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.” “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.”
Finally, Article 2, Section 2 states that: “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”
In summary, these Articles say that:
1) President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and all the members of the current Cabinet could be impeached for demonstrated violations of criminal law and for misconduct that demeans the office or violates the public trust in a manner that injures the state.
2) The House of Representatives begins the formal process by charging the President and, perhaps, others. The Senate conducts the actual trial and it takes a 2/3 majority to impeach upon conviction.
3) The Senate can only remove the impeached party or parties from office. Once out of office, those impeached are subject to other trials under national and international law.
4) The President cannot pardon himself or others who have been impeached.
It is our opinion that the House of Representatives should begin the process of impeachment quickly. Our reasons are as follows:
1) According to most polls, a majority of Americans for over a year have supported impeachment if it can be shown that President Bush and others have violated the Constitution and/or current law.
2) The people we have elected to Congress have all taken the same oath of office that requires them to protect the Constitution.
3) Given the increasing amount of information being made public about activities and actions on the part of President Bush and his Cabinet that appear on the surface to violate the Constitution and various laws of the USA, it is in everyone’s benefit to openly address and redress, if necessary, this public behavior.
September 11, 2006
“NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim Friday, September 8, through Sunday, September 10, 2006, as National Days of Prayer and Remembrance. I ask that the people of the United States and their places of worship mark these National Days of Prayer and Remembrance with memorial services, the ringing of bells, and evening candlelight remembrance vigils. I also invite the people of the world to share in these Days of Prayer and Remembrance.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this fifth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand six, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-first.“
As I used to intone as a parish pastor, “thus saith” George W. Bush. And indeed, national days of prayer and remembrance can be good things. My concerns about this lie primarily in what and whom we are praying for. Surely we will pray that we do not demonize whole peoples, cultures and religions because a few from one have done and may continue to do damage to us. There is no room for stereotyping or racial profiling in our daily conversations. Arab American Muslim people continue to disavow extremist politics as unfaithful to the Koran. We are also called to make honest examinations of our attitudes, prejudices, world view. Looking at ourselves, personally and as a people, through the eyes of those who hate us, is a necessary early step to peace. Why are we hated so? Why do other peoples in many other places feel that we are exploiting them to support our way of life? We view ourselves as good people. And indeed, this nation has done much to help other peoples. But events of the past five years ought to lead us to continuing reality checks.
We will surely pray not to allow hatred to consume us, or racism, bigotry and violence to overwhelm us. To do so will let the terrorists win. That is what they want us to do. They want us to choose violence, death and retribution. But we are here to show the world a better and more perfect way that the terrorist cannot even conceive.
Martin Luther King once said, "If somebody does not have sense enough to turn on the dim and beautiful and powerful lights of love in this world, the whole of our civilization will be plunged into the abyss of destruction. And we will end up destroyed because nobody had any sense on the highway of history. Somewhere, somebody must have some sense. Men must see that force begets force, hate begets hate, toughness begets toughness. And it is all a descending spiral, ultimately ending in destruction for all and everybody. Somebody must have sense enough and morality enough to cut off the chain of hate and the chain of evil in the universe. And you do that with love."
So how about praying for this as an alternative to our national behavior in these days? Instead of dropping bombs, let us renew and redouble our efforts to challenge the ignorance in us and in others, and stand for racial and cultural understanding. Instead of vilifying those around us with whom we disagree, why don't we pay a little extra attention not only to our neighbors but to those many strangers we take for granted, the people who pump our gas, serve our food and bag our groceries, pick up our garbage and deliver our mail, and many others just like them…and let them know that we appreciate what they do for us and the ways in which they make this world a better place.
In fact, instead of dropping bombs and thinking we can just walk away and talk about it with impunity and pride, why don't we drop food for the starving, blankets and clothing for the cold and naked, and medicine for the sick…and not only in this country but throughout the world…and especially in those countries we now consider our enemies?
If we hate and/or continue to hate, the terrorists win. And that's what they want and expect. So let’s renew and redouble also our efforts to choose good over evil. In the words of Robert Kennedy, "Let us rededicate our selves to what the Greeks wrote so many years ago—to tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world."
June 23, 2006
WHAT’S IT GOING TO COST? WHAT DO PEOPLE THINK? If I wanted to buy something as a child, my parents always wanted to know what it would cost. If I was going to be involved in some public behavior, they always wanted to know what I thought other people would think about such behavior. These were good practical (as well as ethical and moral) questions to ask as we learned to make more mature judgments on important issues. These are questions that either seem not to have been asked or avoided or the answers ignored when it comes to the current conflict in Iraq.
Here are two very short answers to these two very important questions. With regard to the cost of the war (1), at this moment it is approaching 300 billion dollars, not including attendant costs (lifetime healthcare and disability benefits for returning veterans, round-the-clock medical attention for many of the 18,000 Americans who already have been seriously wounded, the cost of replacing military hardware that is being used up at about 5 times the peacetime rate, the large reenlistment bonuses and higher benefits to reenlist reluctant soldiers, the borrowed money from abroad with interest, the lifetime economic cost of each military death, just to name a few). The real cost, which includes the attendant costs mentioned above, is projected to be between $1 and $2 trillion (1 trillion is one thousand billion), depending on how long we are involved in Iraq. By way of comparison, even $1 trillion would be twice as much money as would be needed to keep Social Security solvent for the next 75 years. How would you most like your money to be spent?
With regard to what people think about the war(2), it remains a sad story that virtually all news accounts do not accurately convey the poll numbers on this issue. My February 13, 2006 blog pointed out that a then-recent Gallup poll showed almost 60% of Americans wanted a timetable for pulling out of Iraq. Currently, a CNN poll conducted June 14-15 found that 53% favored a timetable for withdrawal. A very recent CBS News poll asked if Iraq was "worth the loss of American life and other costs." The result was that 62% said "no." The NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey last week showed that 57% of the respondents supported reducing troop levels now and most favored setting a timeline. In addition, 54% said they would be "more likely" to vote for a candidate who "Favors pulling all American troops out of Iraq within the next 12 months." I don’t know about you, but I think that the latest polls again conclude the opposite of what many reporters and pundits are still suggesting. In short, I think the Republican Party is going to have a real struggle as it seeks to keep selling this conflict to the American people. At the same time, unless the Democrats in Washington begin prioritizing the message of the few courageous people in Congress who reflect the will of the majority of Americans, their hopes for November will also diminish.
MAY 23, 2006
“Do what you say you are going to do.” I suspect that your mother and father gave that advice to you too. Mine surely gave it to me. I didn’t always fulfill my hopes and promises and often I was held accountable for my lapses. “Do what you say you are going to do” is a strong value held by most people. Being able to trust and rely upon the promises of others is crucial to the well-being of any society. It is within that context that it might be helpful to look at the “promises” of President George W. Bush and leave it to you to determine whether or not he is a “man of his word.”
On Sept. 2, 1999, he said: "Effective reform requires accountability. ... It is a sad story. High hopes, low achievement. Grand plans, unmet goals. My administration will do things differently."
Here is what he said on Oct. 11, 2000: "If we're an arrogant nation, [foreigners] will resent us. If we're a humble nation but strong, they'll welcome us. We've got to be humble."
With regard to the federal budget, on February 27, 2001 he said, "I hope you will join me to pay down $2 trillion in debt during the next 10 years. ... We should approach our nation's budget as any prudent family would."
The environment? On June 11, 2001 he said, "My administration is committed to a leadership role on the issue of climate change."
Human rights? How about this on June 26, 2003? "Notorious human rights abusers, including, among others, Burma, Cuba, North Korea, Iran and Zimbabwe, have long sought to shield their abuses from the eyes of the world by staging elaborate deceptions and denying access to international human rights monitors."
How about health care? On May 25, 2004 he said, "One of the challenges we face is to make sure the health care system responds to the needs of the citizens."
Truth or propaganda…you decide. "See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda."May 24, 2005
What? "No question that the enemy has tried to spread sectarian violence. They use violence as a tool to do that." March 22, 2006
And finally, "I'm the decider, and I decide what is best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the Secretary of Defense."
MARCH 24, 2006
As I write this, I am living in Savannah, GA to avoid the remaining days of winter in Wisconsin. While here we have enjoyed going to a local AME congregation (African Methodist Episcopal) which is lively, warm, committed, and caring. As we passed the third year of the conflict in Iraq, I was reminded of all the church bodies that made statements about the impending invasion before it occurred. I decided to look up where the AME stood at that time. In the process, I was struck by the wisdom of the denominations in the USA and hurt by the profound and continuing lack of influence they had and have on our current federal leadership. Using the Religious News Service as the source, here is what selected church organizations said then:
AFRICAN METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH. The presiding bishop said, “I think that, from my perspective, the right-wing faction of Christianity is doing Christ a disservice by attempting to back their jaunticed views with Scripture, trivializing the Bible in public view and making a mockery of the best traditions of biblical scholarship. I say emphatically that I am not against the military nor military personnel. I am an American. My passport says so. But I think the leadership is wrong. I am praying for him (the president) and for the people of the Middle East.”
THE AMERICAN BAPTIST CHURCH. “Let us pray for the United Nations that it may continue to be a voice, a forum and instrument of peace in these days of terror and the prospect of war. We recommend that President Bush and Secretary of State Powell continue their efforts to work through the United Nations to resolve the issue of Iraqi disarmament through inspections and diplomacy.”
THE NATIONAL BAPTIST CONVENTION. “The president, officers, board of directors, auxiliaries, boards and commissions of NBCUSA, Inc. firmly believe that non-violent social change and international peacemaking are the most desired methods to address any and all infractions of Iraq against the United Nations Resolutions passed relative to weapons of mass destruction in Iraq’s possession.”
THE PROGRESSIVE NATIONAL BAPTIST CONVENTION. “The Progressive National Baptist Convention calls on President George Bush, the Congress, and the United Nations to seek peace and justice through diplomatic means in Iraq just as this administration is seeking better relations with North Korea through diplomacy and not preemptive strikes.”
THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION. (In a public statement of the president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the SBC) “The case for using force to bring about disarmament and regime change in Iraq was clearly and convincingly made for anyone who has eyes to see and ears to hear. Our choice is to pay less now and deal with this problem or we can pay a lot more later and deal with a nuclear-armed Saddam.” (Issued after Colin Powell’s now-famous address to the UN)
UNITED METHODIST CHURCH. “We pray that every possible means to prevent war will be pursued in the coming days. This is not a moment for haste but rather for deep thoughtfulness and prayer. It is a moment to reflect upon the well-spoken concerns of our allied around the world. The welfare of our human family depends on it.”
THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH. “…exhaust all diplomatic and multilateral initiatives as the alternatives to waging war and act only in concert with the United Nations Security Council.”
THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. The events of recent days show that doubts still persist about the moral legitimacy as well as the unpredictable humanitarian consequences of a war with Iraq.”
THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH (USA). “We urge you to do everything in your power to encourage the United Nations inspection process. It is imperative for all that this be a successful effort.”
THE LUTHERAN WORLD FEDERATION. “The ‘just war’ criteria…were designed to constrain – not justify – the resort to war. Indeed, they stand in clear opposition to a preemptive war for the purpose of “regime change.”
THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH IN AMERICA. “As weapons inspectors continue their work, the United Nations debates next steps, the Iraqi people suffer and our government moves closer to war, we must not abdicate our responsibility to both pray for peace and to engage in public conversation regarding what is a just response that might lead to peace.”
THE LUTHERAN CHURCH MISSOURI SYNOD. “Our president has been entrusted with the sword. He may have to use it. We pray for God’s wisdom to guide him in the execution of his duty, that peace may prevail for us and for all people.”
THE UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS. “To permit preemptive or preventive uses of military forces to overthrow threatening or hostile regimes would create deeply troubling moral and legal precedents. Based on the facts that are known, it is difficult to justify resort to war against Iraq.”
POPE JOHN PAUL II. “No to war! War is not always inevitable. It is always a defeat for humanity. International law, honest dialogue, solidarity between the States, the noble exercise of diplomacy: these are methods worthy of individuals and nations in resolving their differences.”
UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST ASSOCIATION. “Raw power cannot heal those wounds hidden in the human heart that lead us to conflict.”
REFORM JUDAISM. “We would prefer that this crisis be resolved by peaceful means, and if military action is necessary, we believe that multi-lateral action would be far preferable to unilateral action. Although we urge the president to pursue all diplomatic means with urgency and resolve, we know that the time for such effort is limited.”
CONSERVATIVE JUDAISM. “..history has also taught us that, at times, those who seek peace must fight for peace. Therefore, we hope that Iraq will use this period of time to comply with the world call for elimination of terrorism. If not, the responsibility of nations and the world to eliminate terrorism through whatever means necessary would be a tragic outcome.”
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EVANGELICALS. “We believe that war or violence is almost always a worst solution for resolving conflict. Insofar as it is possible, all paths to peace should be explored and all possible means should be used for resolving any conflict.”
THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES. “We deplore the fact that the most powerful nations of this world regard war as an acceptable instrument of foreign policy (and war is) an inappropriate means to achieve disarmament of any Iraq weapons of mass destruction.”
THE WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES. “…war against Iraq would be immoral, unwise and in breach of the principles of the United Nations Charter.”
THE MUSLIM AMERICAN SOCIETY. “…based upon our Islamic religious beliefs and concern for our nation’s prosperity and security and the innocent potential Iraqi victims, we call on our government and all peace-loving people and nations to do everything in their power to avoid was and resolve pending issues through peaceful means.”
COUNCIL ON AMERICAN-ISLAMIC RELATIONS. “Any American invasion and occupation of Iraq will fuel anti-American sentiment and would thereby harm our nation’s image and interests in the Middle East and throughout the Muslim world.”
……..and there are many more such quotes. In short the preponderant number of religious communities saw the inherent moral and ethical and legal difficulties of invading Iraq before it happened. The overwhelming majority continue to call for an end to this war and, in many cases, to all war. Once again, the wisdom of the unknown commentator proves to be correct: “A ‘great’ war always creates more scoundrels than it kills.” May we be the living generations that heed our moral leaders and do all in our power to WAGE PEACE!
FEBRUARY 13, 2006
LEST WE FORGET, WE ARE THE MAJORITY!
One of the sad apparent realities of our current political situation is that so many people believe that the Bush Administration represents the attitudes and values of a majority of Americans. There are plenty of directions in which we could point the finger of blame for this, but as we accelerate toward the November 2006 elections, let’s focus on these realities:
1) Fifty-two percent agree with the statement that President Bush should be impeached if he wiretapped US citizens without the approval of a judge. THAT IS A MAJORITY! (www.zogby.com)
2) Fifty-eight percent disapprove of the way that President Bush is handling the situation in Iraq. THAT IS A MAJORITY! (CBS News Poll, Jan. 8, 2006) (Associated Press/Ipsos poll, Jan. 5, 2006)
3) Fifty-nine percent think the US should set a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq. THAT IS A MAJORITY! (Gallup)
4) Fifty-seven percent believe that going to war in Iraq was a mistake. THAT IS A MAJORITY! (CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll)
5) “Seventy-nine percent of Americans want (single-pay insurance) coverage for all, … 67 percent don’t mind if taxes are raised to pay for it, and fully 78 percent are dissatisfied with the present system. Medicare, the one part of the system that is true national health insurance (for seniors) is overwhelmingly popular.” THOSE ARE MAJORITIES! (Gallup Poll)
6) Eighty-three percent favor raising the minimum wage. THAT IS A MAJORITY! (Gallup Poll)
7) Sixty percent favor repealing the Bush Administration’s tax cuts, at least those that go only to the rich. THAT IS A MAJORITY! (Molly Ivins)
8) Sixty-five percent want to reduce the deficit by reducing Pentagon spending or raising taxes, NOT by reducing domestic spending. THAT IS A MAJORITY! (University of Maryland’s Program on International Policy Attitudes)
In short, these predominantly liberal issues are supported BY THE MAJORITY of our citizens. Why do we seem to be so timid in shouting our support of these concerns? If we are not leaders on these issues, we can be sure that once again we will be unheard followers. Honest criticism of opposite policies is a sign of real patriotism and essential for the health of a nation. Here is how Churchill said it, “Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.” Let’s continue to work together toward a healthy state of things! |
