The smiling new face of foreign affairs

By Jamie York

Wingnut Newt Gingrich suggested that President Obama showed weakness when he smiled and shook hands with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. Must a president be cold and unsmiling when conducting foreign affairs? Is a gruff, rough & tumble demeanor the sort of image that the United States needs to portray in the world? That may be the Bush/Cheney approach, but you gain more respect with a smile than a scowl. You can smile and be friendly without being perceived as a wimp, especially when you are confident in your positions. While I may disagree with President Obama on policy issues, I have more respect for him than I did for anyone in the previous administration.

Special Prosecutor needed after release of "torture memos'

By Jamie York

The Obama administration did the right thing in releasing the "torture memos" from the Bush administration and they should be applauded for it. However, the Department of Justice failed to call for an independent special prosecutor to investigate the memos. Learning the truth is one thing, but failing to hold individuals responsible for wrong-doing is quite another matter. How do we justify letting public officials off the hook for possible crimes when common citizens are expected to either follow the “rule of law” or risk going to prison. Public officials should not be above the law or given immunity for crimes. In the coming days and weeks, we will learn more about these torture memos and how public officials violated the Geneva Conventions and International Law.

Dear Mr. President: You are 0-2. What's it gonna be?

By Jamie York

OK, Mr. Obama, you have my heartfelt congratulations! A Chicago grassroots organizer is now president of the United States. That is a major accomplishment in and of itself. It is early in your presidency and I am pleased that you have dealt with some of the worst offenses of the Bush administration through executive orders, but I must say that your larger policies concern me greatly. GREATLY.

First, there is the matter of privacy vs. warrantless wiretapping and electronic spying on Americans. Your Department of Justice, Mr. President, not only supports but goes beyond the Bush administration in preventing government accountability for willful violations of the law regarding COINTELPRO-style electronic eavesdropping. Your DOJ recently argued that the U.S. possesses “sovereign immunity” from misconduct lawsuits. Yet you pledged government accountability during the campaign. Strike one.

Then there is the matter of giving away billions of dollars in taxpayer funds to the same capitalist bankers that helped loot the public treasury in the first place. They must be laughing all the way out of the bank while our money goes to offshore accounts just as fast as they get their grubby hands on it. I got news for you: giving money to the banks is not going to stop the coming depression.

It seems to me that someone with ties to the Chicago grassroots community would bail out the unemployed and working poor first so that people do not lose their homes to the Wall Street thieves; to make sure that everyone has adequate food and access to health care whether they have a job with benefits or not. As you know, companies are laying off employees, eliminating health benefits, cutting back on retirement, and reducing hours in order to save money. What are people supposed to do? Starve? Turn to crime? Strike two.

Now I hear that you are asking Congress for more than $83 billion for continuing the Bush wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. I remember very clearly what you said during the campaign and I even made a ringtone out of it so everyone I am around is reminded as well: “When I am elected president I am going to end this war in Iraq and bring our troops home.” (Crowd cheers.) $83 billion will bring the total amount of money wasted on war up to $1 trillion.

One Trillion Dollars. That is One Thousand Billion Dollars! Or One Million Million Dollars! And there is no end in sight because you cannot fight a cowardly hit-and-run tactic like terrorism no matter how many people you kill and no matter how much money you spend in trying. Of course, the money enriches the military contractors who constantly lobby for more money. But the American people suffer; the Iraqi people suffer; and the Afghani people suffer. Osama bin Laden could have been captured years ago if Bush would have asked for the world’s help rather than insisting that the United States did not need help -- and then talking crazy about smoking evil-doers out of their holes. Bush was like a bad cartoon.

One Thousand Billion Dollars wasted while states scramble to find money to pay state employees, pay unemployment benefits, and pay for educating our children while teachers have to meet the unfunded burden of No Child Left Behind. States like Ohio are even looking at gambling to bring us out of of debt, as if the Wall Street gamblers have not done enough damage. Now the rich and super-rich casino operators will be holding us by the ankles and shaking us to make sure they get all of our money.

Casinos to pay for educating our children? What kind of craziness is this? Does this make sense to a Chicago grassroots organizer? Is this the way the United States should be operating? Isn’t there a more fair and equitable -- indeed, a more reasonable -- economic system that we could work toward? Shouldn’t we be making 5, 10, and 20-year plans in order to ensure that human beings are able to have a job, decent housing, health, dental and eye care, safe food, and clean air and drinking water? What has happened to our priorities in a nation that espouses freedom and democracy, yet leaves its citizens’ dreams at the mercy of the market?

Socialism may seem like a dirty word to the Wall Street bankers, casino operators, military contractors, FOX News anchors, and other assorted con men and thieves who now thrive in the every-man-for-himself jungle of international capitalism. But a nation can have both personal freedom and genuine democracy and take care of citizen needs. It’s not that hard. You nationalize the banks, utilities, oil companies, health care conglomerates and other major industries then run them in the public interest, not for private profit. You eliminate the profit-taking at the top and reinvest at the bottom. Imagine a wellness-based single payer health care system free of insurance tycoons who now have the audacity to step in and change a doctor’s orders because it would interfere with their profits? No more of that nonsense.

This does not mean that the United States become the Soviet Union. No one wants that. We make our own brand of socialism based upon our long-held belief in liberty and justice for all. We do not restrict personal freedom; we expand it. We welcome those immigrants now living and working in our nation by giving them the opportunity for citizenship. We pay everyone a living wage, provide expanded Medicare for all citizens, make sure that schools are fully funded, and we invest in green technologies to provide millions of jobs and get away from fossil fuels. We invest in rebuilding our dilapidated water and sewer systems, our bridges, our railroads, our inner cities. We develop high-speed rail. We use science to find new ways to improve our lives through research and development. We change outdated laws that now keep many non-violent offenders in prison and we use community policing and community corrections to focus on genuine rehabilitation rather than prison warehousing. We get government out of citizens’ bedrooms by permitting marriage unions between same sex couples.

Which road should a Chicago grassroots organizer choose? A road to individual prosperity and full-employment or the same old road where the rich man plays while the little man pays? We can rebuild our infrastructure or watch it crumble as roving gangs go from neighborhood to neighborhood stealing whatever they can. We can rethink our priorities on taking care of ourselves as citizens or we can watch our prisons become the number one industry in the nation. We can develop new green transportation now or do nothing as gas prices skyrocket to $10 or more per gallon.

Strike three? Let’s be real before you swing at the next pitch. The United States is a mess and there are no easy solutions or quick fixes. This ain’t McDonald’s. Social and economic change takes time and a willingness to sacrifice now so that future generations will not have to. Rebuilding infrastructure takes time, perhaps even more than one generation. Can we accept a way of life in which we may not see the benefits in our lifetime? It takes time to convert from a “me” society that leads the world in the consumption of fossil fuels to a “we” society that has a low carbon footprint. Until we can produce millions of electric commuter cars, we may even have to ration gas at some point, making sure that fuel goes to farmers and distribution outlets before personal use in automobiles.

Many sacrifices, some of which are unpredictable now, must be made so that our grandchildren and great-grandchildren can live in a humane nation that prioritizes its needs and produces to meet those needs. If we fail to act soon, our children will be living in a fascist dictatorship where nothing is provided or guaranteed by government, including Social Security; where fuel is unavailable and food is not affordable for most people; where brown-outs and blackouts are commonplace as the electric grid fails from the lack of upkeep; where clean drinking water is unavailable because polluters have lobbied against regulations that impede their profit-taking; where few people can afford health insurance and those without the ability to pay up front are turned away by armed hospital guards. This is not science fiction. This is a glimpse at the future unless we, collectively, as citizens, demand of our leaders that we take a different road now.

Which road should a former grassroots organizer choose? The count is 0-2.

The Insurance Mafia

Support the National Health Insurance Act (HR 676)!

By Jamie York

When Bill Clinton was in his first term as president in 1992, he vowed to revamp the health care system in the United States. He held up a single insurance card and said that under his plan every American would have one of those cards. It was to be the only insurance card a person would need because Clinton was advocating a single payer health care system and every American was to be covered. In addition, that card was to be imbedded with a memory chip that would hold all of one's medical records, including medical history, test results, digital XRAYs, Pet Scans, MRIs, dental and optometrist records -- anything that pertains to one's well being. Present your card to a health care provider and you will be taken care of. No other insurance needed.

Clinton's plan immediately drew intense fire from the multi-billion-dollar insurance industry, so, rather than stick up for single payer as rational and viable, he backed down with his tail between his legs and asked Hillary to work with the insurance industry and come up with a new plan. Of course, this secret new plan, conceived behind closed doors in consultation with insurance industry tycoons, soon became known as "managed care." Hillary's managed care plan is really nothing more than an ineffective cost-containment plan and has nothing to do with providing quality health care coverage for every American. There are still more than 33 million Americans without any coverage whatsoever and the quality of health care in 2009 is even worse than it was when Clinton first became president.

During the 2000 presidential campaign, George W. Bush and Al Gore talked about the cost of prescription drugs for seniors, but neither candidate dared to mention a single payer health care system and no reporters stepped up to challenge them about it. Clinton made a lot of enemies when he held up that single payer card and his administration never fully recovered from it. Similarly, in 2008, as Barack Obama was running for president, he initially said he supported single payer health care, then began talking about health care “reform,” which is a code word for same-old same-old. In a March 26, 2009, town hall meeting, Obama said that he wanted to reform the system that is already in place. Like Bill Clinton, Obama cried “uncle” on single payer.

When I think of the insurance industry, I think about a Mafioso requiring small business owners to pay them protection money in order to gain immunity from violence. What is the difference between paying the Mafia for protection from violence and paying an insurance company for protection from illness? The only difference I can see is that the Mafia are regarded as criminals and their activities are illegal while insurance companies operate freely as legitimate businesses and their activities have become accepted.

Today, we are expected to pay for protection against illness, motor vehicle accidents, fire, flood, theft -- you name it and some insurance Mafioso will accept your money for protection against it. If, after buying food and paying our bills and taxes, we cannot afford to pay for such protection, then we could be denied emergency health care services or we could be left literally with nothing but the clothes on our backs. To me, the idea of paying the insurance mafia for health care protection is particularly unnerving because I believe that food, shelter, health care and education are essential for human survival and should be considered birthrights, not simple privileges for those who can afford them. For most people, there is little left after we pay our monthly bills, yet insurance premiums keep going up. The premiums I paid to my former health care HMO -- Kaiser Permanente -- doubled during the Clinton administration, so I then dropped Kaiser for a Prudential plan that had cheaper premiums but required more out-of-pocket payments in case of illness. As long as I didn't get sick and have to pay high out-of-pocket expenses, I could pay the monthly premiums. After changing jobs, however, I was without insurance coverage for nearly a year, then I enrolled in an employer's Blue Cross plan with a very high deductible, but I soon received a letter informing me that because I hadn't had continuous insurance coverage they would not pay for any pre-existing conditions until I had been enrolled in their plan for one year. It was an important reminder to me that insurance companies are in business to maximize their profits.

While I am in favor of a health care system that is free from the cradle to the grave, I also realize that in a capitalist economy, health care is not a birthright but is a privilege under the terms of the free market. Pay the insurance mafia or do without. Proponents of the current health care marketplace argue that a "socialized" health care system will somehow take away their freedom of choice regarding which doctors they see and which treatments are offered. But under managed care, as more physician practices are gobbled up by corporate chains, it is nearly impossible for many patients to see the doctor of their choice and the treatment options for most standard procedures are often dictated by the chain, not by the doctor. How many of us have heard the familiar mantra: "I'm sorry, Dr. Jones is not available on those days, but I can get you in to see Dr. Smith in two weeks." Under single payer, the doctor-patient relationship will come first, as it should. Hospitals are also hiring their own staff of doctors -- called "hospitalists" -- and are excluding many local family doctors from having hospital privileges. If you have to be admitted to the hospital, your own doctor may not be able to see you there and the hospitalist may not order the tests you need in order to save money for the hospital.

A single-payer health care bill now before Congress is HR 676. This bill, sponsored by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), would give every American expanded Medicare coverage that would also include eye care, dental and long-term health care. A federally-regulated single payer health care system will not be a free system -- we will be taxed for it -- but it will provide efficient, streamlined health care for all Americans by eliminating the profit-taking and high administrative costs of the mafia system. It will save billions of dollars. Of course, the insurance mafia and their supporters in Congress and in the media will go to great lengths to scare the public away from single payer. They will scream “socialism!” They will wave the flag and argue that privatization equals free choice while single payer equals a return to "big government." The truth, however, is that in the current private system -- the mafia system -- 35 percent of health care costs are administrative. These administrative costs include marketing, insurance company profits, CEO salaries, pre-authorization panels and billing clerks. When a doctor orders a test on a patient -- a CT or PET scan, for example -- the cost of the procedure is inflated to pay these high administrative costs. Single payer will help to streamline the health care system by eliminating the administrative "middle man" from the doctor-patient relationship; as a result, the cost of exams will be lower and doctors will be free to practice medicine without bureaucratic interference from the insurance mafia.

It is time to end the reign of the insurance mafia and put single payer on the national agenda. The mainstream politicians and the collaborative "lapdog" media are not going to bring up the issue of single payer, so it's up to the public to support HR 676 and tell their representatives to back it also.

Holding Obama's feet to the fire

By Jamie York

Before 9/11, George W. Bush was not a popular president and he received much criticism early in his presidency. After 9/11, when the nation was trying to rebound emotionally from this tragedy, Bush’s approval rating went up. Why? After 9/11, the mass media did not challenge him on his facts and allowed him free range to pursue his agenda -- a permanent “war on terrorism,” the occupation of Iraq, approving torture, secret CIA prisons, an end to habeas corpus, and widespread spying on Americans. Criticism of Bush was viewed by the media brass as being unpatriotic and dissenting opinions thus received little air time. Red, white and blue banners decorated the screens of the 24-hour cable news networks and the news anchors wore their shiny new American flag lapel pins. The only “debate” on the news was between the right and the far-right.

Today, President Obama has reversed some Bush policies. Obama has issued executive orders to close the Guantanamo gulag, ban torture, grant more access to federal documents under the Freedom of Information Act, freeze pay for White House staff, provide for more openness in government, and to end the abortion “gag rule.” Most of the debate today centers around Obama’s economic stimulus plan and bank bailouts. Although a central theme in the Obama campaign was to end the war in Iraq and bring the troops home, the economy is the main focus right now, yet Obama also announced a troop increase in Afghanistan.

Writing directly to our representatives and to the president is one way to make our views known, but that does not hold the president’s feet to the fire. To do that, we must hold the electronic media’s feet to the fire and demand that they present a wide range of views. Write to the cable news networks that set the tone for national and international news. Try blogging and micro-blogging on social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter, and Myspace to help bring democracy to the media. We can even -- if we are bold enough -- record a video editorial from our home computers and post it on YouTube. Remember, the Executive Branch is supposed to be equal to the Legislative and Judicial branches. Bush basically turned the presidency into a kingdom and we can take some solace in that fact that Obama has at least dealt with some of the more troubling dirty deeds of the Bush administration. But there is much more work to be done….