Work

I haven’t been here in a while, and I’m not sure when I’ll be back, but as this year and decade closes and I’ve been reading every press outlet in creation do a summary of the decade, I felt I should do the same.  Since I was born late in 1979, every decade has essentially been a chapter in my life.  Particularly since I am about to shift my career down a new path, this truly is the end of a chapter in my life.  So, here is my summary of the 2000s in my world, in no particular order of time or importance, but as thoughts and memories come to my mind.

• I got back into UF.
• I changed my major from journalism to political science.
• I graduated!
• I went to grad school at UCF.
• I am still finishing my thesis.
• I met the person I thought was my soul mate.
• I got married.
• I got divorced.
• I was obviously wrong about three lines above.
• I lost my mother tragically.
• I have thought about her every day since.
• I have watched my brother become a real mensch.
• I have watched my father enjoy life.
• I got the job of my dreams.
• I witnessed democracy in action.
• I participated in making this nation a better place for everyone.
• I walked the same halls as leaders, patriots, and heroes.
• Three years later, I am moving on to something new.
• I helped elect Barack Obama.
• I worked for Robert Wexler.
• I worked for Shelley Berkley.
• I worked for UCF Campus Life.
• I worked for SITEL/General Motors.
• I was editor-in-chief of a college newspaper.
• I witnessed my sports teams win 6 championships.
• I witnessed our world change forever on September 11, 2001.
• I made some of the most incredible friends I could ever hope for.
• I rekindled some friendships from the prior decade.
• I bought my first car, and still have it.
• I moved five times.
• I traveled to Germany and Russia.
• I flew all over the United States.
• I went on my first cruise.
• I went skiing for the first time, too.
• I gained 40 lbs.
• I also gained a tremendous amount of life experience.
• I believe 30 really is the new 20.
• I fought for what I believe is right.
• I will continue to do so.
• I have found my purpose in life.
• I am so excited about what the 2010s will bring.

Thank you for reading.  Happy New Year everyone.

We all go through times in our lives when we are forced to deal with significant change.  It is never easy, but it is especially difficult when the chapter in your life that is ending is one that is so positive, rewarding, and special.

My boss announced his resignation today, effective January 3, 2010.  He will be taking the position of President for the Center for Middle East Peace and Economic Cooperation, which is an incredible opportunity for him to work hands-on to achieve meaningful progress in the Middle East peace process.  He expressed to us directly his reasons for making this choice for himself and for his family, and I completely respect his choice and believe he is doing the right thing for them, as anyone would do for themselves and their family.

What this means for me, however, is that after that date, I do not have a secure job.  There are many possibilities out there, and I have been fortunate to build a lot of great relationships with people around DC who have already expressed an interest in helping me to find my next calling.  That may be on Capitol Hill.  It may not be.  I will know in the coming weeks as the situation evolves.

Either way, I want everyone to understand how much of an honor and privilege it truly has been to work for Robert Wexler.  Many of the issues I work on for him are not the most glamorous, nor are they at the top of his legislative agenda or personal interest.  Yet, he knew how hard I worked on them to both his benefit and to the benefit of the cause for which we were working, and he never failed to thank me for all of my efforts and for my dedication to him and to the office.

When Robert met with us to inform us of his decision, it was a very emotional moment.  I will remember his face, how difficult it was for him to keep his composure, and how much gratitude he expressed to all of us for our loyalty to him.  My three years with him pale in comparison to the many in our office who have been with him the entire 13 years he has spent in Washington.  In one case, 19 years dating back to his time in the Florida Senate.

Robert Wexler will be remembered in Congress for his legislative accomplishments, his work on so many critical issues, his drive to work on behalf of his constituents, and his dedication to progressive ideals.  I, too, will remember all of these, but as one of the few who was given the privilege of working with him, I will remember him for his kindness, sincerity, and collegiality.  He is a true role model, and I am a better person having spent my early years in politics working with him.

Good luck, Robert, and if you ever decide to run for office again, give me a call.

To see a copy of my resolution, click here.

Many of you have probably seen articles about or the video showing the couple who walked into various offices of ACORN, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, posing as a pimp and prostitute, and the alleged advice that ACORN staff at these offices provided to them regarding how to maintain a prostitution business and evade paying taxes.

As a reaction to this news story, as well as concerns from some on the right that ACORN was also involved in voter registration fraud during the 2008 election, the Senate passed a bill yesterday preventing ACORN from receiving any federal funding for their operations.  Additionally, today, as part of a bill that increases funding for higher education, the House of Representatives included and overwhelmingly passed an amendment presented by the GOP leadership which not only defunds ACORN, but prohibits federal funds for any indicted organizations.  Not convicted.  Indicted.

I am not here to defend ACORN.  What was seen on that video was certainly damning, and if they truly are engaged in illegal actions on either front of which they are accused, they need to be dealt with to the fullest extent of the law.

I will remind you, however, that for both individuals and organizations, the law applies the same: you are innocent until proven guilty.  ACORN, just like you if you were accused of a crime, deserves due process.

So this is where I have a serious problem with what the House and Senate have done.  Article I, Section 9 of the United States Constitution provides that “no Bill of Attainder shall be passed by the Congress.”  In Lehman’s terms, a Bill of Attainder is an act of any legislative body declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a trial.

Both bills passed in the Congress clearly do this.  Not only do they punish this organization (or in the case of the House bill, any organization) without a conviction, but the House version makes it legal to punish organizations that are merely indicted.  An indictment is not a confirmation of guilt.  It is merely the initiation of the process of determining guilt.

Both bills are clearly unconstitutional, and I do not see how anyone who claims to be a constitutionalist, or anyone who is of the opinion that the sacred document of our democracy should be read as it is written, can deny that.  So I am quite disappointed in what the Congress has done over the past two days, and while I am fairly certain neither bill will be signed into law as it is currently written, it is still a sad state of affairs that legislators fail to refer to the founding document of our democracy before pursuing legislative action.

Democrats and Republicans alike are responsible for this reactionary legislative failure, and it is a shame.  When ACORN or any other organization like it is given its due process and found guilty of a crime, I have no problem with defunding them and holding them fully accountable.  Until then, they should be given the same rights of any other individual or organization accused of a crime.  I am sure you value your right to a due process, and there is no reason they should not have that right.

Full text of President Obama’s address on health care to the Joint Session of Congress

Wednesday, September 9, 2009
****

Madame Speaker, Vice President Biden, Members of Congress, and the American people:

When I spoke here last winter, this nation was facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. We were losing an average of 700,000 jobs per month. Credit was frozen. And our financial system was on the verge of collapse.

As any American who is still looking for work or a way to pay their bills will tell you, we are by no means out of the woods. A full and vibrant recovery is many months away. And I will not let up until those Americans who seek jobs can find them; until those businesses that seek capital and credit can thrive; until all responsible homeowners can stay in their homes. That is our ultimate goal. But thanks to the bold and decisive action we have taken since January, I can stand here with confidence and say that we have pulled this economy back from the brink.

I want to thank the members of this body for your efforts and your support in these last several months, and especially those who have taken the difficult votes that have put us on a path to recovery. I also want to thank the American people for their patience and resolve during this trying time for our nation.

But we did not come here just to clean up crises. We came to build a future. So tonight, I return to speak to all of you about an issue that is central to that future – and that is the issue of health care.

I am not the first President to take up this cause, but I am determined to be the last. It has now been nearly a century since Theodore Roosevelt first called for health care reform. And ever since, nearly every President and Congress, whether Democrat or Republican, has attempted to meet this challenge in some way. A bill for comprehensive health reform was first introduced by John Dingell Sr. in 1943. Sixty-five years later, his son continues to introduce that same bill at the beginning of each session.

Our collective failure to meet this challenge – year after year, decade after decade – has led us to a breaking point. Everyone understands the extraordinary hardships that are placed on the uninsured, who live every day just one accident or illness away from bankruptcy. These are not primarily people on welfare. These are middle-class Americans. Some can’t get insurance on the job. Others are self-employed, and can’t afford it, since buying insurance on your own costs you three times as much as the coverage you get from your employer. Many other Americans who are willing and able to pay are still denied insurance due to previous illnesses or conditions that insurance companies decide are too risky or expensive to cover.

We are the only advanced democracy on Earth – the only wealthy nation – that allows such hardships for millions of its people. There are now more than thirty million American citizens who cannot get coverage. In just a two year period, one in every three Americans goes without health care coverage at some point. And every day, 14,000 Americans lose their coverage. In other words, it can happen to anyone.

But the problem that plagues the health care system is not just a problem of the uninsured. Those who do have insurance have never had less security and stability than they do today. More and more Americans worry that if you move, lose your job, or change your job, you’ll lose your health insurance too. More and more Americans pay their premiums, only to discover that their insurance company has dropped their coverage when they get sick, or won’t pay the full cost of care. It happens every day.

One man from Illinois lost his coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because his insurer found that he hadn’t reported gallstones that he didn’t even know about. They delayed his treatment, and he died because of it. Another woman from Texas was about to get a double mastectomy when her insurance company canceled her policy because she forgot to declare a case of acne. By the time she had her insurance reinstated, her breast cancer more than doubled in size. That is heart-breaking, it is wrong, and no one should be treated that way in the United States of America.

Then there’s the problem of rising costs. We spend one-and-a-half times more per person on health care than any other country, but we aren’t any healthier for it. This is one of the reasons that insurance premiums have gone up three times faster than wages. It’s why so many employers – especially small businesses – are forcing their employees to pay more for insurance, or are dropping their coverage entirely. It’s why so many aspiring entrepreneurs cannot afford to open a business in the first place, and why American businesses that compete internationally – like our automakers – are at a huge disadvantage. And it’s why those of us with health insurance are also paying a hidden and growing tax for those without it – about $1000 per year that pays for somebody else’s emergency room and charitable care.

Finally, our health care system is placing an unsustainable burden on taxpayers. When health care costs grow at the rate they have, it puts greater pressure on programs like Medicare and Medicaid. If we do nothing to slow these skyrocketing costs, we will eventually be spending more on Medicare and Medicaid than every other government program combined. Put simply, our health care problem is our deficit problem. Nothing else even comes close.

These are the facts. Nobody disputes them. We know we must reform this system. The question is how.

There are those on the left who believe that the only way to fix the system is through a single-payer system like Canada’s, where we would severely restrict the private insurance market and have the government provide coverage for everyone. On the right, there are those who argue that we should end the employer-based system and leave individuals to buy health insurance on their own.

I have to say that there are arguments to be made for both approaches. But either one would represent a radical shift that would disrupt the health care most people currently have. Since health care represents one-sixth of our economy, I believe it makes more sense to build on what works and fix what doesn’t, rather than try to build an entirely new system from scratch. And that is precisely what those of you in Congress have tried to do over the past several months.

During that time, we have seen Washington at its best and its worst.

We have seen many in this chamber work tirelessly for the better part of this year to offer thoughtful ideas about how to achieve reform. Of the five committees asked to develop bills, four have completed their work, and the Senate Finance Committee announced today that it will move forward next week. That has never happened before. Our overall efforts have been supported by an unprecedented coalition of doctors and nurses; hospitals, seniors’ groups and even drug companies – many of whom opposed reform in the past. And there is agreement in this chamber on about eighty percent of what needs to be done, putting us closer to the goal of reform than we have ever been.

But what we have also seen in these last months is the same partisan spectacle that only hardens the disdain many Americans have toward their own government. Instead of honest debate, we have seen scare tactics. Some have dug into unyielding ideological camps that offer no hope of compromise. Too many have used this as an opportunity to score short-term political points, even if it robs the country of our opportunity to solve a long-term challenge. And out of this blizzard of charges and counter-charges, confusion has reigned.

Well the time for bickering is over. The time for games has passed. Now is the season for action. Now is when we must bring the best ideas of both parties together, and show the American people that we can still do what we were sent here to do. Now is the time to deliver on health care.

The plan I’m announcing tonight would meet three basic goals:

It will provide more security and stability to those who have health insurance. It will provide insurance to those who don’t. And it will slow the growth of health care costs for our families, our businesses, and our government. It’s a plan that asks everyone to take responsibility for meeting this challenge – not just government and insurance companies, but employers and individuals. And it’s a plan that incorporates ideas from Senators and Congressmen; from Democrats and Republicans – and yes, from some of my opponents in both the primary and general election.

Here are the details that every American needs to know about this plan:

First, if you are among the hundreds of millions of Americans who already have health insurance through your job, Medicare, Medicaid, or the VA, nothing in this plan will require you or your employer to change the coverage or the doctor you have. Let me repeat this: nothing in our plan requires you to change what you have.

What this plan will do is to make the insurance you have work better for you. Under this plan, it will be against the law for insurance companies to deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition. As soon as I sign this bill, it will be against the law for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick or water it down when you need it most. They will no longer be able to place some arbitrary cap on the amount of coverage you can receive in a given year or a lifetime. We will place a limit on how much you can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses, because in the United States of America, no one should go broke because they get sick. And insurance companies will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies – because there’s no reason we shouldn’t be catching diseases like breast cancer and colon cancer before they get worse. That makes sense, it saves money, and it saves lives.

That’s what Americans who have health insurance can expect from this plan – more security and stability.

Now, if you’re one of the tens of millions of Americans who don’t currently have health insurance, the second part of this plan will finally offer you quality, affordable choices. If you lose your job or change your job, you will be able to get coverage. If you strike out on your own and start a small business, you will be able to get coverage. We will do this by creating a new insurance exchange – a marketplace where individuals and small businesses will be able to shop for health insurance at competitive prices. Insurance companies will have an incentive to participate in this exchange because it lets them compete for millions of new customers. As one big group, these customers will have greater leverage to bargain with the insurance companies for better prices and quality coverage. This is how large companies and government employees get affordable insurance. It’s how everyone in this Congress gets affordable insurance. And it’s time to give every American the same opportunity that we’ve given ourselves.

For those individuals and small businesses who still cannot afford the lower-priced insurance available in the exchange, we will provide tax credits, the size of which will be based on your need. And all insurance companies that want access to this new marketplace will have to abide by the consumer protections I already mentioned. This exchange will take effect in four years, which will give us time to do it right. In the meantime, for those Americans who can’t get insurance today because they have pre-existing medical conditions, we will immediately offer low-cost coverage that will protect you against financial ruin if you become seriously ill. This was a good idea when Senator John McCain proposed it in the campaign, it’s a good idea now, and we should embrace it.

Now, even if we provide these affordable options, there may be those – particularly the young and healthy – who still want to take the risk and go without coverage. There may still be companies that refuse to do right by their workers. The problem is, such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us money. If there are affordable options and people still don’t sign up for health insurance, it means we pay for those people’s expensive emergency room visits. If some businesses don’t provide workers health care, it forces the rest of us to pick up the tab when their workers get sick, and gives those businesses an unfair advantage over their competitors. And unless everybody does their part, many of the insurance reforms we seek – especially requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions – just can’t be achieved.

That’s why under my plan, individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance – just as most states require you to carry auto insurance. Likewise, businesses will be required to either offer their workers health care, or chip in to help cover the cost of their workers. There will be a hardship waiver for those individuals who still cannot afford coverage, and 95% of all small businesses, because of their size and narrow profit margin, would be exempt from these requirements. But we cannot have large businesses and individuals who can afford coverage game the system by avoiding responsibility to themselves or their employees. Improving our health care system only works if everybody does their part.

While there remain some significant details to be ironed out, I believe a broad consensus exists for the aspects of the plan I just outlined: consumer protections for those with insurance, an exchange that allows individuals and small businesses to purchase affordable coverage, and a requirement that people who can afford insurance get insurance.

And I have no doubt that these reforms would greatly benefit Americans from all walks of life, as well as the economy as a whole. Still, given all the misinformation that’s been spread over the past few months, I realize that many Americans have grown nervous about reform. So tonight I’d like to address some of the key controversies that are still out there.

Some of people’s concerns have grown out of bogus claims spread by those whose only agenda is to kill reform at any cost. The best example is the claim, made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens. Such a charge would be laughable if it weren’t so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple.

There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false – the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally. And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up – under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.

My health care proposal has also been attacked by some who oppose reform as a “government takeover” of the entire health care system. As proof, critics point to a provision in our plan that allows the uninsured and small businesses to choose a publicly-sponsored insurance option, administered by the government just like Medicaid or Medicare.

So let me set the record straight. My guiding principle is, and always has been, that consumers do better when there is choice and competition. Unfortunately, in 34 states, 75% of the insurance market is controlled by five or fewer companies. In Alabama, almost 90% is controlled by just one company. Without competition, the price of insurance goes up and the quality goes down. And it makes it easier for insurance companies to treat their customers badly – by cherry-picking the healthiest individuals and trying to drop the sickest; by overcharging small businesses who have no leverage; and by jacking up rates.

Insurance executives don’t do this because they are bad people. They do it because it’s profitable. As one former insurance executive testified before Congress, insurance companies are not only encouraged to find reasons to drop the seriously ill; they are rewarded for it. All of this is in service of meeting what this former executive called “Wall Street’s relentless profit expectations.”

Now, I have no interest in putting insurance companies out of business. They provide a legitimate service, and employ a lot of our friends and neighbors. I just want to hold them accountable. The insurance reforms that I’ve already mentioned would do just that. But an additional step we can take to keep insurance companies honest is by making a not-for-profit public option available in the insurance exchange. Let me be clear – it would only be an option for those who don’t have insurance. No one would be forced to choose it, and it would not impact those of you who already have insurance. In fact, based on Congressional Budget Office estimates, we believe that less than 5% of Americans would sign up.

Despite all this, the insurance companies and their allies don’t like this idea. They argue that these private companies can’t fairly compete with the government. And they’d be right if taxpayers were subsidizing this public insurance option. But they won’t be. I have insisted that like any private insurance company, the public insurance option would have to be self-sufficient and rely on the premiums it collects. But by avoiding some of the overhead that gets eaten up at private companies by profits, excessive administrative costs and executive salaries, it could provide a good deal for consumers. It would also keep pressure on private insurers to keep their policies affordable and treat their customers better, the same way public colleges and universities provide additional choice and competition to students without in any way inhibiting a vibrant system of private colleges and universities.

It’s worth noting that a strong majority of Americans still favor a public insurance option of the sort I’ve proposed tonight. But its impact shouldn’t be exaggerated – by the left, the right, or the media. It is only one part of my plan, and should not be used as a handy excuse for the usual Washington ideological battles. To my progressive friends, I would remind you that for decades, the driving idea behind reform has been to end insurance company abuses and make coverage affordable for those without it. The public option is only a means to that end – and we should remain open to other ideas that accomplish our ultimate goal. And to my Republican friends, I say that rather than making wild claims about a government takeover of health care, we should work together to address any legitimate concerns you may have.

For example, some have suggested that that the public option go into effect only in those markets where insurance companies are not providing affordable policies. Others propose a co-op or another non-profit entity to administer the plan. These are all constructive ideas worth exploring. But I will not back down on the basic principle that if Americans can’t find affordable coverage, we will provide you with a choice. And I will make sure that no government bureaucrat or insurance company bureaucrat gets between you and the care that you need.

Finally, let me discuss an issue that is a great concern to me, to members of this chamber, and to the public – and that is how we pay for this plan.

Here’s what you need to know. First, I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits – either now or in the future. Period. And to prove that I’m serious, there will be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promised don’t materialize. Part of the reason I faced a trillion dollar deficit when I walked in the door of the White House is because too many initiatives over the last decade were not paid for – from the Iraq War to tax breaks for the wealthy. I will not make that same mistake with health care.

Second, we’ve estimated that most of this plan can be paid for by finding savings within the existing health care system – a system that is currently full of waste and abuse. Right now, too much of the hard-earned savings and tax dollars we spend on health care doesn’t make us healthier. That’s not my judgment – it’s the judgment of medical professionals across this country. And this is also true when it comes to Medicare and Medicaid.

In fact, I want to speak directly to America’s seniors for a moment, because Medicare is another issue that’s been subjected to demagoguery and distortion during the course of this debate.

More than four decades ago, this nation stood up for the principle that after a lifetime of hard work, our seniors should not be left to struggle with a pile of medical bills in their later years. That is how Medicare was born. And it remains a sacred trust that must be passed down from one generation to the next. That is why not a dollar of the Medicare trust fund will be used to pay for this plan.

The only thing this plan would eliminate is the hundreds of billions of dollars in waste and fraud, as well as unwarranted subsidies in Medicare that go to insurance companies – subsidies that do everything to pad their profits and nothing to improve your care. And we will also create an independent commission of doctors and medical experts charged with identifying more waste in the years ahead.

These steps will ensure that you – America’s seniors – get the benefits you’ve been promised. They will ensure that Medicare is there for future generations. And we can use some of the savings to fill the gap in coverage that forces too many seniors to pay thousands of dollars a year out of their own pocket for prescription drugs. That’s what this plan will do for you. So don’t pay attention to those scary stories about how your benefits will be cut – especially since some of the same folks who are spreading these tall tales have fought against Medicare in the past, and just this year supported a budget that would have essentially turned Medicare into a privatized voucher program. That will never happen on my watch. I will protect Medicare.

Now, because Medicare is such a big part of the health care system, making the program more efficient can help usher in changes in the way we deliver health care that can reduce costs for everybody. We have long known that some places, like the Intermountain Healthcare in Utah or the Geisinger Health System in rural Pennsylvania, offer high-quality care at costs below average. The commission can help encourage the adoption of these common-sense best practices by doctors and medical professionals throughout the system – everything from reducing hospital infection rates to encouraging better coordination between teams of doctors.

Reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan. Much of the rest would be paid for with revenues from the very same drug and insurance companies that stand to benefit from tens of millions of new customers. This reform will charge insurance companies a fee for their most expensive policies, which will encourage them to provide greater value for the money – an idea which has the support of Democratic and Republican experts. And according to these same experts, this modest change could help hold down the cost of health care for all of us in the long-run.

Finally, many in this chamber – particularly on the Republican side of the aisle – have long insisted that reforming our medical malpractice laws can help bring down the cost of health care. I don’t believe malpractice reform is a silver bullet, but I have talked to enough doctors to know that defensive medicine may be contributing to unnecessary costs. So I am proposing that we move forward on a range of ideas about how to put patient safety first and let doctors focus on practicing medicine. I know that the Bush Administration considered authorizing demonstration projects in individual states to test these issues. It’s a good idea, and I am directing my Secretary of Health and Human Services to move forward on this initiative today.

Add it all up, and the plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over ten years – less than we have spent on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and less than the tax cuts for the wealthiest few Americans that Congress passed at the beginning of the previous administration. Most of these costs will be paid for with money already being spent – but spent badly – in the existing health care system. The plan will not add to our deficit. The middle-class will realize greater security, not higher taxes. And if we are able to slow the growth of health care costs by just one-tenth of one percent each year, it will actually reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the long term.

This is the plan I’m proposing. It’s a plan that incorporates ideas from many of the people in this room tonight – Democrats and Republicans. And I will continue to seek common ground in the weeks ahead. If you come to me with a serious set of proposals, I will be there to listen. My door is always open.

But know this: I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it’s better politics to kill this plan than improve it. I will not stand by while the special interests use the same old tactics to keep things exactly the way they are. If you misrepresent what’s in the plan, we will call you out. And I will not accept the status quo as a solution. Not this time. Not now.

Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing. Our deficit will grow. More families will go bankrupt. More businesses will close. More Americans will lose their coverage when they are sick and need it most. And more will die as a result. We know these things to be true.

That is why we cannot fail. Because there are too many Americans counting on us to succeed – the ones who suffer silently, and the ones who shared their stories with us at town hall meetings, in emails, and in letters.

I received one of those letters a few days ago. It was from our beloved friend and colleague, Ted Kennedy. He had written it back in May, shortly after he was told that his illness was terminal. He asked that it be delivered upon his death.

In it, he spoke about what a happy time his last months were, thanks to the love and support of family and friends, his wife, Vicki, and his children, who are here tonight . And he expressed confidence that this would be the year that health care reform – “that great unfinished business of our society,” he called it – would finally pass. He repeated the truth that health care is decisive for our future prosperity, but he also reminded me that “it concerns more than material things.” “What we face,” he wrote, “is above all a moral issue; at stake are not just the details of policy, but fundamental principles of social justice and the character of our country.”

I’ve thought about that phrase quite a bit in recent days – the character of our country. One of the unique and wonderful things about America has always been our self-reliance, our rugged individualism, our fierce defense of freedom and our healthy skepticism of government. And figuring out the appropriate size and role of government has always been a source of rigorous and sometimes angry debate.

For some of Ted Kennedy’s critics, his brand of liberalism represented an affront to American liberty. In their mind, his passion for universal health care was nothing more than a passion for big government.

But those of us who knew Teddy and worked with him here – people of both parties – know that what drove him was something more. His friend, Orrin Hatch, knows that. They worked together to provide children with health insurance. His friend John McCain knows that. They worked together on a Patient’s Bill of Rights. His friend Chuck Grassley knows that. They worked together to provide health care to children with disabilities.

On issues like these, Ted Kennedy’s passion was born not of some rigid ideology, but of his own experience. It was the experience of having two children stricken with cancer. He never forgot the sheer terror and helplessness that any parent feels when a child is badly sick; and he was able to imagine what it must be like for those without insurance; what it would be like to have to say to a wife or a child or an aging parent – there is something that could make you better, but I just can’t afford it.

That large-heartedness – that concern and regard for the plight of others – is not a partisan feeling. It is not a Republican or a Democratic feeling. It, too, is part of the American character. Our ability to stand in other people’s shoes. A recognition that we are all in this together; that when fortune turns against one of us, others are there to lend a helping hand. A belief that in this country, hard work and responsibility should be rewarded by some measure of security and fair play; and an acknowledgement that sometimes government has to step in to help deliver on that promise.

This has always been the history of our progress. In 1933, when over half of our seniors could not support themselves and millions had seen their savings wiped away, there were those who argued that Social Security would lead to socialism. But the men and women of Congress stood fast, and we are all the better for it. In 1965, when some argued that Medicare represented a government takeover of health care, members of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, did not back down. They joined together so that all of us could enter our golden years with some basic peace of mind.

You see, our predecessors understood that government could not, and should not, solve every problem. They understood that there are instances when the gains in security from government action are not worth the added constraints on our freedom. But they also understood that the danger of too much government is matched by the perils of too little; that without the leavening hand of wise policy, markets can crash, monopolies can stifle competition, and the vulnerable can be exploited. And they knew that when any government measure, no matter how carefully crafted or beneficial, is subject to scorn; when any efforts to help people in need are attacked as un-American; when facts and reason are thrown overboard and only timidity passes for wisdom, and we can no longer even engage in a civil conversation with each other over the things that truly matter – that at that point we don’t merely lose our capacity to solve big challenges. We lose something essential about ourselves.

What was true then remains true today. I understand how difficult this health care debate has been. I know that many in this country are deeply skeptical that government is looking out for them. I understand that the politically safe move would be to kick the can further down the road – to defer reform one more year, or one more election, or one more term.

But that’s not what the moment calls for. That’s not what we came here to do. We did not come to fear the future. We came here to shape it. I still believe we can act even when it’s hard. I still believe we can replace acrimony with civility, and gridlock with progress. I still believe we can do great things, and that here and now we will meet history’s test.

Because that is who we are. That is our calling. That is our character. Thank you, God Bless You, and may God Bless the United States of America.

Stick to the message

by Dave Feinman

http://youthroll.com/stick-to-the-message/

If you are on the pro-side of the health care debate, you are probably feeling frustrated and annoyed.

It’s not easy defending the truth, but it is the price of being elected to govern.  A lot of responsibility and difficulty comes with being in the majority.  Aside from the obvious responsibilities of defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, and passing the agenda on which you were elected with the goal of improving the lives of all Americans, there is the challenge of fighting the smears and lies propagated by the minority.

I say this not as a partisan, but as a realist about the role the minority party plays in a government like that which we have now.  When the majority maintains the level of control over legislative action that the Democrats currently have, the minority relies on public opinion to sway debate and the progress of the majority.  It is the one realm of politics which they can manipulate, and with that being the case, that is where all their effort goes.

There is no better example of this than the health care debate, and the ugliness of such tactics are also very apparent.  If this tactic provided for a meaningful discussion of the truth behind the legislation being debated, it would be productive.  Since it more often than not is a campaign of lies and scare tactics, it does nothing but serve political gains for the minority, regardless of the importance of the issue at hand or the need for the public, regardless of which side of the issue they are on, to have meaningful discourse on the issue.

So as I continue to reply to letters and answer phone calls about the health care bill and suffer through the weeks of “recess” until the bill can actually move forward, I am reminding myself of something each day before I head into the office: stick to the message.

A lie is always easier than the truth.  Especially in an era of politics during which no political party (or most politicians) has the trust of the American people, it does not take much to convince people that the party in power has an ulterior motive.  Many people are convinced that power breeds corruption, regardless of who is in power.  We have President Nixon to thank for that.  In this way, along with having no responsibility to pass an agenda, the minority always has the advantage.

So when it comes to, for example, the portion of the health care bill discussing allowances for individuals to seek end-of-life counseling every five years and for doctors to receive payment for providing such guidance, it is much easier to say that the government is forcing end-of-life decisions on people and that the government will “pull the plug on Grandma.”  It is easy to say, it immediately instills fear, and just like any other lie, it requires no explanation or justification because, honestly, who cares about proof these days?

A significant majority of this country is either not willing, not concerned with, or not able to do their own research to find the truth.  They hear something, and if it stirs up any emotions in them (especially fear), they run with it.  So, the greatest challenge of being in the majority is having to constantly be on the defensive, reacting to the lobs of lies being thrown from the other side of the battlefield, and making every effort to stick to the message and make sure information is as available as possible.

This is a challenge, but it is one that is gladly accepted by those who keep in perspective the greater goal: to ensure meaningful reform is passed to improve the lives of the American people.  This applies not only in the case of the health care bill now, but anything else that stirs controversy in the public discourse.

So, as the August doldrums roll through and you find yourself annoyed reading the blogs and watching cable news, just remember: stick to the message.  The truth will set you free and, in the end, will improve all of our lives for generations to come.

August is meant for relaxing.

I’m convinced that when Aloysius Lilius first proposed the Gregorian calendar and Pope Gregory XIII decreed it, August was designated as the month for relaxation.

Even the powers that be at the United States Congress believed so, at least back in the day.  Well, truth be told, until World War II, Congress was only in session on average about four months of the year.  But as far as I know, August has always been a month off because, as anyone who has ever lived here knows, DC generally turns into a sauna in August.  Imagine being here prior to the invention of air conditioning!  There’s a good reason one of Florida’s two statues in the Capitol is Dr. John Gorrie, the inventor of modern refrigeration and air conditioning.

As I’ve blogged about previously though, recess isn’t really recess.  At least this year.  Half of the office has been on vacation the past few weeks, and the ones remaining, myself included, have been plenty busy.  Well, now it’s my turn for a little relaxation.

Tomorrow, I zoom off to Minneapolis for some R&R with a good friend I haven’t seen in 24 years.  Yes, you read that correctly.  Big props to Facebook and cheap airline tickets for making that happen.  Looking forward to catching up and having a few days during which I need not think about health care reform, Chinese drywall, or the rest of the litany of things on my plate at work right now.

After this extended weekend, I have another four days in the office before I take an entire week off.  Including the weekends surrounding it, that’s nine days off.  Beautiful.  A few days on a beach somewhere sounds really good.  Will have to make that happen.

Too young to (want health) care?

by Dave Feinman

http://youthroll.com/too-young-to-want-health-care/

There are many fallacies surrounding the health care reform legislation being considered in Congress and pushed by President Obama.  One of the greatest and most baseless is the fallacy that the youth of this country do not want or need health insurance, and the fact that this fallacy is not being seriously challenged is disturbing.

As a staffer on Capitol Hill, I have had the book thrown at me about H.R. 3200, the America’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009.  I have heard every reason why this bill should not be passed, most of which are lies and conservative scare tactics.  It will cover illegal aliens.  It will ration care.  It will lead to the end of private health insurance options.  It will kill seniors.  Seriously.  Thank you for that, Virginia Foxx.

I have grown numb to most of these excuses.  They are all false, but they are also all being challenged in the public discourse by established lobbies who know the truth of the bill being written in the House.  One fallacy, however, that is not being challenged at all is that our generation does not want or need health insurance.

Amazingly, I have heard and read this very often in phone conversations and in constituent letters.  In the debate over whether to and how to reform health care, the statistic that 47 million Americans have no health insurance is often cited, and is just as often disputed.  Opponents of reform tear that number apart and break it down into various groups of people who, in their view, are either not deserving of or not wanting or needing insurance.

While I have not taken a tally, I feel confident saying that the idea that young people do not want or need health insurance is used just as often as any other justification for not providing universal coverage or ensuring all Americans have access to care.  They then claim that this demographic is a significant portion of the 47 million who are currently uninsured, thus serving to water down the seriousness of the problem we truly face and, at the same time, once again removing the youth from the debate on an issue critical to our present and future.

As someone not far removed from my college years, I remember my dilemma with health insurance prior to starting my career on the Hill.  My parents had great health insurance, and I was able to stay on their plan for a few years into my college education.  I did not finish my undergraduate degree in four years, however, and at age 21, took a break from school.  My health insurance took a break too.

From that point until three years ago when I came to the Hill, I was on and off of insurance plans, and when I was on, the costs were high and the quality was debatable.  Over that six year period, I probably visited a doctor twice.  Luckily, I had no serious health problems to deal with during that time.  But for anyone in their right mind to believe that someone on the verge of completing their education and hoping to start a family and build a life in the near future would not want health care…well, they need to get their head checked.  Of course, they’d need health insurance to do that too.  But I digress.

If every human has the right to be born, every human has the right to live a healthy life.  That’s not written in any law or religious doctrine, but since we all seem to be in the business of telling others what rights they have lately, I feel I should put my stake in the ground.  No demographic circumstance, particularly age, education, or financial means, should prevent someone from having access to quality health care.

That includes us, the youth of this country, who came together in the millions to bring change to the White House less than a year ago.  I would argue we are the most at-risk generation in this debate.  Our health and well-being, not Congressional Budget Office projections or compromises with Blue Dog Democrats, will ultimately determine the economic viability of any health care reform, and thus this nation, going forward.  The healthier younger people are from the start and the more access to care that they have as they grow older, the less likely they will be a burden on the system down the road.  In addition, the choices made now on this issue will bear the greatest burden on our lives since we have the longest to live.  We must have a voice in this debate, and we must be clear that quality, affordable health care is important to us.

The issue of providing universal health care is an assault on conservative principles from two angles: government involvement in one’s life and fiscal conservatism.  I get that.  But let’s look at this in the long-term for once.  The key to a long and healthy life is preventive care.  Any extended gap in such care can significantly contribute to the rate and frequency of serious health problems later on in life.

If all Americans are given access to affordable, quality care from the start of their lives, they will be less of a burden on Medicare and on emergency services, both of which are responsible for significant portions of our nation’s health care spending, which reached $2.4 trillion last year.  Yes, trillion.  For conservatives, ensuring people are healthier from the beginning of their lives and have consistent access to quality care kills two birds with one stone: less entitlement spending and less of a need for the government to be in people’s lives through such programs.

Such care is guaranteed for children through Medicaid and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) if your parents do not have health insurance.  Beyond that, all bets are off.  This is unacceptable, and it is about time our generation spoke up.  We were told we could not affect change, and we proved everyone wrong in 2008.  Now, we must once again prove that we are not too young to know what we want and need.

In 1944, President Franklin Roosevelt made a proposal during his State of the Union Address that our country had come to recognize and should implement a second bill of rights.  Among this “economic bill of rights” was the right to medical care.  In this new age of progressive politics, this is the time for our generation to choose a torch with which to run.  Let that torch be affordable, quality health care for all.