Health care for all Americans is not a matter of socialism, but of Christian beliefs, filmmaker Michael Moore told a standing room only crowd of Democrats in Brighton Wednesday night.
Moore, speaking by conference call, said he was taught by nuns in school while growing up in Flint that taking care of other people who are sick or poor or in need is the Christian thing to do.
"Instead of socialized medicine, we should call it Christianized medicine," said Moore, adding that the Jewish and Muslim religions have similar beliefs.
Moore spoke as part of a Democracy for America event that joined people in 288 houseparties in 46 states and the District of Columbia. People at the events watched Moore's movie Sicko and then joined in the conference call.
The event brought more than 60 people to the Livingston County Democrats' headquarters.
Sicko, which has drawn excellent reviews, explores the tragic effects of America's for-profit health insurance system, which rewards doctors for denying care to sick people, and contrasts it with health care received by people in other nations. Too often, Moore found, Americans are paying more and getting less care.
Moore boils down the issue of health care in America to the essential question -- what kind of nation are we?
In the conference call after the movie was shown, Moore said Americans' fear of having government pay for health care instead of for-profit insurance companies is tied up with Americans' fear of their own government. Even though the United States claims that it is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, Moore said, people are still taught to be afraid of government. In effect, he said, we are afraid of ourselves.
Moore also said that American doctors are becoming a demoralized group, no longer making as much money as their Canadian counterparts because of the extra staff they need to argue with insurance companies over payment for patients' care.
Moore admitted that Americans can get elective care, such as knee surgeries, after a shorter wait than Canadians. But he pointed out that's because Canada believes in treating everybody, while the American system leaves out 50 million people. And he said he would rather live in a country that lets everybody in line, and wait an extra month for elective surgery, than jump to the head of the line at the expense of others.
The event was the third movie night sponsored by Livingston Democrats this year. Previous films screened were Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth and Robert Greenwald's Iraq for Sale.
The next film in the series will be another Iraq war documentary called No End in Sight.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Saturday, November 10, 2007
Ending Term Limits a Good Idea, but Lawmakers Really Need a Budget Deadline
The way Michigan's budget crisis was handled -- without state government having to shut down for more than a few hours due to last-minute legislative action -- is being blamed on term limits and none other than the Michigan Chamber of Commerce is behind the proposal to repeal them.
I'm skeptical.
Having well-heeled lobbyists for business propose something makes me suspicious right off the bat. When term limits were passed in 1992, some of the speculation was that inexperienced lawmakers would rely on lobbyists for advice and that lobbyists would essentially run the House and Senate, even more than they were doing already. Apparently, that hasn't happened, at least not to the extent the Chamber anticipated.
I didn't like term limits when they were passed in 1992, and I still don't like them. I'd like to see them gone entirely so that voters can decide for themselves who should go and who should stay in office.
Term limits make it difficult for the average lawmaker to learn the complicated budgeting process and bring that experience to bear on balancing the budget in financially challenging times. Lawmakers who are only around for a few years also do not have time to develop trust among themselves that can make it easier to reach solutions. And more importantly, they don't have to worry about the problems that their short-term solutions create, because they will be gone and won't have to deal with the fall-out. It will be someone else's problem.
But even after saying all that, I'm not sure that term limits alone are to blame for whatever problems people perceive in Michigan's legislative process. And the idea of docking lawmakers' pay if they don't show up for work seems even less likely to have a major impact. Other structural problems in Michigan's government play a bigger role, in my opinion, and should be part of any effort to change term limits if the proposal is to have significant impact.
One of the biggest problems is the open-ended nature of Michigan's budget process, due to our full-time Legislature. Although the legislative session begins early in the year and the governor presents an annual State of the State message in January, followed by a detailed budget proposal, lawmakers feel no pressure to act for months at a time. Governors have little power to force another branch of government to act.
This doesn't mean necessarily that lawmakers are lazy, although it can mean that. Witness the arrogance of Senate Republicans who went on vacation this summer even as state universities were begging for action on the budget.
Partly, it's human nature to put off distasteful jobs until later. When budget news is bad, there's always the hope that prospects will brighten as the year goes on. Why vote for unpopular budget cuts or tax increases early in the year that turn out to be unnecessary by year's end? You can bet lobbyists who oppose tax increases were whispering that into lawmakers' ears during the last 11 months.
Furthermore, negotiations on budget cuts take time. Who makes their final offer right off the bat when buying a car or a house? People usually dicker back and forth for a while. Imagine the amount of dickering that must go on when negotiating not just one deal, but dozens and dozens of them that go into a multi-billion-dollar budget, especially when all the deals have unpopular aspects.
Term limits, by putting inexperienced people with little trust of each other in charge of the process, makes the tendency to delay even stronger.
But to make sure the budget is finished earlier, lengthening time in office won't be enough. Any constitutional amendment that attempts to deal with the problem should include a deadline for legislative action on a balanced budget -- say July 1.
A July 1 deadline would help schools and universities plan for the year and set tuition levels. It also would ensure that a budget is in place in time to avoid a government shutdown before the Oct. 1 state fiscal year.
If fiscal conditions worsen after July 1, throwing the budget out of balance, lawmakers can always revisit the budget or the governor can take executive action.
Of course, both houses of the Legislature could enact their own rules requiring the budget to be finished earlier, but with different parties controlling each chamber that's unlikely to happen. And those rules could always be suspended by lawmakers, although that would look bad.
Another reform that should be included to avoid the problems seen this year would be to change the election of senators so that half stand for election every two years.
Under the current arrangement, no senator will be up for re-election in 2008. The entire chamber is insulated from public opinion until 2010. By then, voters will have forgotten the way the Michigan Senate impeded efforts to deal with this year's crisis. If half the senators were facing re-election next year, they might have been more anxious to get the job done for fear voters would take out their ire on them at the polls.
If public-spirited groups want to make fundamental change in Michigan's budgeting process, they need to do more than lengthen term limits or people will be disappointed with the results once again. And we certainly don't need more cynicism about public service.
I'm skeptical.
Having well-heeled lobbyists for business propose something makes me suspicious right off the bat. When term limits were passed in 1992, some of the speculation was that inexperienced lawmakers would rely on lobbyists for advice and that lobbyists would essentially run the House and Senate, even more than they were doing already. Apparently, that hasn't happened, at least not to the extent the Chamber anticipated.
I didn't like term limits when they were passed in 1992, and I still don't like them. I'd like to see them gone entirely so that voters can decide for themselves who should go and who should stay in office.
Term limits make it difficult for the average lawmaker to learn the complicated budgeting process and bring that experience to bear on balancing the budget in financially challenging times. Lawmakers who are only around for a few years also do not have time to develop trust among themselves that can make it easier to reach solutions. And more importantly, they don't have to worry about the problems that their short-term solutions create, because they will be gone and won't have to deal with the fall-out. It will be someone else's problem.
But even after saying all that, I'm not sure that term limits alone are to blame for whatever problems people perceive in Michigan's legislative process. And the idea of docking lawmakers' pay if they don't show up for work seems even less likely to have a major impact. Other structural problems in Michigan's government play a bigger role, in my opinion, and should be part of any effort to change term limits if the proposal is to have significant impact.
One of the biggest problems is the open-ended nature of Michigan's budget process, due to our full-time Legislature. Although the legislative session begins early in the year and the governor presents an annual State of the State message in January, followed by a detailed budget proposal, lawmakers feel no pressure to act for months at a time. Governors have little power to force another branch of government to act.
This doesn't mean necessarily that lawmakers are lazy, although it can mean that. Witness the arrogance of Senate Republicans who went on vacation this summer even as state universities were begging for action on the budget.
Partly, it's human nature to put off distasteful jobs until later. When budget news is bad, there's always the hope that prospects will brighten as the year goes on. Why vote for unpopular budget cuts or tax increases early in the year that turn out to be unnecessary by year's end? You can bet lobbyists who oppose tax increases were whispering that into lawmakers' ears during the last 11 months.
Furthermore, negotiations on budget cuts take time. Who makes their final offer right off the bat when buying a car or a house? People usually dicker back and forth for a while. Imagine the amount of dickering that must go on when negotiating not just one deal, but dozens and dozens of them that go into a multi-billion-dollar budget, especially when all the deals have unpopular aspects.
Term limits, by putting inexperienced people with little trust of each other in charge of the process, makes the tendency to delay even stronger.
But to make sure the budget is finished earlier, lengthening time in office won't be enough. Any constitutional amendment that attempts to deal with the problem should include a deadline for legislative action on a balanced budget -- say July 1.
A July 1 deadline would help schools and universities plan for the year and set tuition levels. It also would ensure that a budget is in place in time to avoid a government shutdown before the Oct. 1 state fiscal year.
If fiscal conditions worsen after July 1, throwing the budget out of balance, lawmakers can always revisit the budget or the governor can take executive action.
Of course, both houses of the Legislature could enact their own rules requiring the budget to be finished earlier, but with different parties controlling each chamber that's unlikely to happen. And those rules could always be suspended by lawmakers, although that would look bad.
Another reform that should be included to avoid the problems seen this year would be to change the election of senators so that half stand for election every two years.
Under the current arrangement, no senator will be up for re-election in 2008. The entire chamber is insulated from public opinion until 2010. By then, voters will have forgotten the way the Michigan Senate impeded efforts to deal with this year's crisis. If half the senators were facing re-election next year, they might have been more anxious to get the job done for fear voters would take out their ire on them at the polls.
If public-spirited groups want to make fundamental change in Michigan's budgeting process, they need to do more than lengthen term limits or people will be disappointed with the results once again. And we certainly don't need more cynicism about public service.
Health Coverage Making You Sick? See 'Sicko' and Talk to Michael Moore
Is your health care coverage giving you headaches? Have you ever thought your health care procedures were going to be paid for by your insurance, only to have your claim come back marked "Denied"?
Michael Moore compiled thousands of such stories before making his movie "Sicko" on American health care. Reviewers have praised Moore's latest work. "Radically fierce and funny" is what the Rolling Stone reviewer called "Sicko." The New York Times' reviewer said it was ''the least controversial and most broadly appealing of Mr. Moore's movies." And also the funniest.
Now this Wednesday (November 14, 2007), you'll have a chance to see "Sicko" and to hear Michael Moore himself talk about the movie.
Livingston County Democrats are teaming up with Democracy for America to host a showing of "Sicko," along with more than 200 other groups around the country. After the showings, the groups will join in a conference call with Michael Moore.
The Livingston County event will take place at Livingston County Democrats' party headquarters, 10321 East Grand River, Brighton. Doors will open at 6:30 p.m., with the movie starting at 7:15 p.m. The conference call with Moore will take place at 9:30 p.m. Coffee, tea, and desserts will be served.
Donations will be greatly appreciated.
If you'd like more information, please call party headquarters, 810-229-4212.
P.S. The Livingston Press and Argus mistakenly listed the event as planned for Tuesday, but is correcting that information in its Sunday edition. The event is Wednesday, November 14.
Michael Moore compiled thousands of such stories before making his movie "Sicko" on American health care. Reviewers have praised Moore's latest work. "Radically fierce and funny" is what the Rolling Stone reviewer called "Sicko." The New York Times' reviewer said it was ''the least controversial and most broadly appealing of Mr. Moore's movies." And also the funniest.
Now this Wednesday (November 14, 2007), you'll have a chance to see "Sicko" and to hear Michael Moore himself talk about the movie.
Livingston County Democrats are teaming up with Democracy for America to host a showing of "Sicko," along with more than 200 other groups around the country. After the showings, the groups will join in a conference call with Michael Moore.
The Livingston County event will take place at Livingston County Democrats' party headquarters, 10321 East Grand River, Brighton. Doors will open at 6:30 p.m., with the movie starting at 7:15 p.m. The conference call with Moore will take place at 9:30 p.m. Coffee, tea, and desserts will be served.
Donations will be greatly appreciated.
If you'd like more information, please call party headquarters, 810-229-4212.
P.S. The Livingston Press and Argus mistakenly listed the event as planned for Tuesday, but is correcting that information in its Sunday edition. The event is Wednesday, November 14.
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Recalls Slow to Materialize in Livingston
While recalls against lawmakers who voted to save our state from budget chaos are moving ahead elsewhere in the state, petitions have yet to surface in Livingston County against Republicans Rep. Chris Ward and Sen. Valde Garcia.
The Livingston Press and Argus, in an article in the edition for Tuesday (Nov. 6, 2007)quotes Michigan Taxpayers Association head Leon Drolet as saying people here are still interested in a recall but they want to find the "ideal window" of 90 days to collect the necessary signatures. And he says they want to make sure the petition language passes muster before rushing to file it.
Seems to me that the ideal 90-day window might be around the Jan. 15 Republican presidential primary, but I'm just guessing.
The Livingston Press and Argus, in an article in the edition for Tuesday (Nov. 6, 2007)quotes Michigan Taxpayers Association head Leon Drolet as saying people here are still interested in a recall but they want to find the "ideal window" of 90 days to collect the necessary signatures. And he says they want to make sure the petition language passes muster before rushing to file it.
Seems to me that the ideal 90-day window might be around the Jan. 15 Republican presidential primary, but I'm just guessing.
Friday, November 2, 2007
Caution: You Are About to Enter an Unfiltered Zone
People:
Trouble, oh we got trouble,
Right here in Hamburg Townhip!
With a capital "T"
That comes right before "U"
And that stands for Unfiltered.
We've surely got trouble!
Right here in Hamburg Township,
Right here!
Gotta figger out a way
To keep the young ones moral after school!
Trouble, trouble, trouble, trouble, trouble...
My apologies to Meredith Willson, but that's what we've got folks. Trouble in Hamburg Township. We thought we were safe, but unbeknownst to us, we were "unfiltered."
All this time, the Internet, with a capital "I," has been flowing unfiltered into our library. And people have been allowed to go into the library and look at this unfiltered material. For years.
Not that it's been a real problem. Only once has a Hamburg librarian caught a patron doing something "inappropriate" at a library computer. The librarian who saw him apparently fondling himself called police, who whisked the man away.
But once was one too many times for the vigilantees on the Hamburg Board of Trustees, which decided to warn the public that the Internet is "unfiltered" at the library.
Never mind that the trustees do not control the library -- it has its own elected board and its own millage, although the township owns the building and the land on which the library sits.
Never mind that the library already has a policy in place for dealing with such situations and already has restrictions on the use of its computers.
Never mind that the unfiltered Internet that is spewing out dangerous ideas is also flowing unfiltered into thousands of homes in Hamburg Township, thanks to the cable franchise approved by the same Hamburg Board of Trustees.
The trustees, led by Trustee Pat Hohl, wasted who knows how much public money putting up this 20 square foot sign warning the public about the "unfiltered" Internet. According to the Livingston Community News, the trustees were going to say it was "unresticted," until they found out from the library board that there are 13 restrictions on Internet use.
So they went with "unfiltered," which makes it sound like a health hazard, until you get to the part about "objectionable material" possibly being visible to the general public.
So who defines what is "objectional material" -- Hohl and the rest of the trustees? And what exactly are their standards for determining that? They probably would find anything from Moveon.org or John Edwards' campaign "objectionable."
And once the trustees start finding things "objectionable" on the Internet, who says they'll stop there? What's next -- signs warning the public about "objectionable" material in the library's music collection, its newspapers, its books? I'll bet Hohl would find lots of "objectionable" material in The New York Times.
As Peg Eibler, library board vice president, put it, "To me, what they're doing is the same as book burning. It's book burning with a different media."
Having our ideas unfiltered, either by Hohl or anyone else, happens to be one of the rights guaranteed to us Americans by the Bill of Rights to our Constitution. And if you don't have a copy of the Bill of Rights, here's a link -- unfiltered -- to a copy on the Internet.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
More Democrats than They Think
Evidence that there are more Democrats in Livingston County than some people think can crop up in unusual places and at unusual times.
Like on Halloween.
I answered my door Wednesday night (Oct. 31, 2007) to the usual assortment of princess, ninjas, ghosts, and goblines and filled their opened bags and pillowcases with Reese's Peanut Butter Cups and miniature Snickers.
But amidst the usual characters was a boy (I think) in a navy blue suit, white shirt, tie, a flag pin in the suit lapel, and a big rubber mask of -- Bill Clinton.
I was so glad to see him that I gave him extra Snickers.
Like on Halloween.
I answered my door Wednesday night (Oct. 31, 2007) to the usual assortment of princess, ninjas, ghosts, and goblines and filled their opened bags and pillowcases with Reese's Peanut Butter Cups and miniature Snickers.
But amidst the usual characters was a boy (I think) in a navy blue suit, white shirt, tie, a flag pin in the suit lapel, and a big rubber mask of -- Bill Clinton.
I was so glad to see him that I gave him extra Snickers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)