Category Archives: Congress

Double Standard: The Anthony Weiner Business

Sunday, June 12, 2011

Anthony Weiner – Congressman, husband and soon to be father – has made a mess out of his life and career. He’s been unfaithful to his marriage and has, in no small way, betrayed the trust of his constituents by allowing his influence in Congress to be significantly diminished and then lying about his behavior. That many have called for him to resign may be understandable, but it’s wrong. It’s a manifestation of significant hypocrisy and immaturity on their part and of a double standard that’s well worth pointing out.

Congressman Weiner is sick. I’m neither a psychologist nor psychiatrist, but I’m pretty sure that the nature and extent of his behavior are over the lines that define the wide normal portion of the bell curve in which most of us reside.

If he had cancer or had been in a serious auto accident, everyone would be wishing him well and a speedy recovery. He’d take as much sick leave as he needed and return to work when he was up to it. Yes, if his illness or injury was so severe that he couldn’t return to work, could no longer be effective at what he was hired to do, that would be that – but he shouldn’t be pressured to resign before it’s determined that a recovery isn’t possible, that he can no longer do his job.

Sure, Congressman Wiener’s work depends heavily upon how people react to him. In very real terms, he’s been disfigured. The question is, if an otherwise productive colleague is, literally or figuratively, hard to look at, hard to talk to, is that his or her problem, or ours? Where do we draw the line? What’s the right thing for us to do?

What about the lie? People in auto accidents and who contract cancer don’t lie about their situations? Actually, there was a time not too long ago when they did, deny or at least avoid telling people they had cancer and certain other diseases fearing the consequences of adverse workplace reaction. Even in these more enlightened times, people with mental illnesses are still embarrassed by them. Same thing for homosexuality, which is a personal attribute, not an illness, but can still adversely impact personal and professional interaction.

Congressman Weiner has an illness, a mental or emotional illness, but an illness nonetheless. Lying about it is not only understandable in light of the double standard which is evident in the reaction of his colleagues and others, it is symptomatic of his disorder. He shouldn’t resign, certainly not yet, not until medical professionals determine that a recovery can’t be accomplished, that continuing to work is not conducive – from his, the patient’s point of view – to his attaining good mental health.

However bizarre and disturbing his behavior, we need to go out of our way to be tolerant and supportive, to treat him as we would anyone else who wasn’t well.

-wf

Healthcare Legislation: Blowing Off 15 Million Americans

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

“In the beginning…” Sounds biblical, doesn’t it? In the beginning, going way back to January 20 of this year, the day Barack Obama took office, there were two reasons for healthcare reform legislation. They were, in no particular order: (1) Because the costs of healthcare are spiraling out of control; and (2) Because there are an estimated 46 million Americans who have no medical insurance at all and who, because they can’t afford it, are not receiving adequate healthcare. This piece is about the second of these reasons, the need for universal healthcare, for a system, a program that would ensure that all Americans would have access to the quality healthcare they need.

To his credit, President Obama wasted no time telling Congress to get its collective ass in gear to devise and pass healthcare reform legislation of, once again, biblical proportions. Easier said than done.
Continue…

Missing the Point: And Senator Reid wonders why so many Americans hold Congress in such low esteem?

Thursday, November 19, 2009

No question about it, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has done his best to devise healthcare reform legislation that the Congressional Budget Office would agree will be “deficit neutral,” or better. That means that it would produce at least much savings and income as it costs. In fact, the CBO estimates that the Senator’s bill, while costing us $849 billion, will actually end up saving us $127 billion, albeit over 10 years – an accomplishment in which the Senator and our President take considerable pride.
Continue…

One dollar, one vote? It’s time we put an end to Congressional lobbying.

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Our Constitution defines a Congress in which the people are represented as individuals in the House of Representatives, and as states in the Senate. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that money gets to vote.   Continue…

Bum’s Rush: What are the Democrats (and President Obama) so worried about?

Thursday, September 24, 2009

It’s been a bad and telling couple of days for our democracy.

The Senate Finance Committee has voted against language which would have required the Senate to post its healthcare reform bill on the Internet for public review before voting on it.* To their credit, it has been Republicans in both the House and the Senate who are the ones pushing for this public review – and for updated information from the Congressional Budget Office. It’s the Democrats, in marked contradiction to candidate Obama’s promise of a transparent government, who are opposing allowing the public time to study this legislation prior taking a vote.

Just to be clear, the Republicans are asking for only a measly 72 hours during which the public – ordinary citizens like you and me – would have to read over 1,000 pages of complex, comprehensive healthcare reform legislation, think about it, talk among ourselves and convey our opinions to our Congressmen and Senators who would then need days to sort through the deluge of comments they’re likely to receive. All this in just 72 hours, and the Democrats won’t even give us that? What in the world are they so worried about?

To be fair, they’re probably more concerned about what the Congressional Budget Office might tell us. Either way, this healthcare reform legislative process has just gone from “difficult” to “nuts.”

There’s a common sense rule in business that the more the other side is pushing to close a deal, the more carefully you need to look at what they’re offering. This is one of those times.

More importantly, there’s a bigger issue at play here than healthcare reform. What the Democrats – and we’ve got to include President Obama – are telling us is that we, the people, are not even allowed a peripheral role in the legislative process. Legislation is their business. They, the Democrats in Congress, will determine when we’re allowed to speak and under what circumstances. What arrogance. Fair enough. We’ll just wait until Tuesday, November 2, 2010 and let them know what we think when it’s our turn.

-wf

*See “GOP seeks 72-hour window to read bills,” in today’s on-line edition of The Washington Times.


Site Meter

Healthcare Reform Legislation: The Idea That Will Finally Make It Happen

Monday, September 14, 2009

ATTN: Republican Members of the House and Senate

We’re all concerned about the deficit, about government spending that’s out of control, about an inexperienced, naïve President who fervently believes in the power of government to influence the private sector, almost regardless of the cost.

The good news is that President Obama has pledged, time and time again, that he will not sign healthcare reform legislation that increases our budget deficit. Fine, let’s call him on it.*

It’s simple. All you need to do is require that the President and Democrats in Congress agree to put a reasonable limit on the deficit as a condition for Republican support for healthcare reform. Demand “fiscal responsibility.” What could be more consistent with the classic definition of “Republicanism”?

One of two things will be true. Either the President will decline in which case it will be obvious that he doesn’t really support limited government spending and/or believe in his ability to accomplish prudent fiscal management, or he’ll agree, in which we’re all better off for it and Republicans running for office everywhere will get credit for having suggested the idea in the first place.

Can you imagine a President or Congress which, particularly under the circumstances, declines to limit the budget deficit even to levels in the trillions of dollars? Whatever the outcome, it’s not often that an entire political party finds itself in such a profoundly win-win situation. To fail to take advantage of it would prove to me and the American people that you (the Republicans) deserve to be a minority party.

*If you have time, you might want to read, “Calling the President Out,” published Friday, September 11, 2009.

-wf


Site Meter

Congressional Dreaming: Doing Away With The Senate And Other Radical Changes We Need To Make Congress Work

Tuesday, September 1, 2009

Let me say right from the outset, this is one of those postings that is going to make my children cringe. Fortunately, it’s a free country and no one important really knows they’re related to me. Fearlessly, I’m saying for the record what I concluded years ago, that the Congress has too many members, too constantly engaged in the process of getting elected, to be an efficient or effective decision-making body.

I recommend making three changes, each of which requires amending our Constitution. Without question, I cannot overstate my reluctance to tamper with this historic document. Unfortunately, as the decades long historic and current debates over healthcare reform legislation affirm, it has gotten to the point where any concerns I may have about changing the Constitution are outweighed by the adverse social and fiscal consequences of Congressional inaction and ineptitude when they finally do get around to doing something.

The American people don’t trust or respect their Congress, and for good reason. That’s got to change. No democracy can endure if the people hold their legislature in such low regard.

First, I want to do away with the Senate. (Okay, everybody, breathe.) I understand that our founding fathers needed to acknowledge states rights as part of some process of compromise. More than two centuries later, it’s time we recognize that states have no inherent rights to representation. Lincoln said that we are a nation “of the people, by the people, for the people.” States were nowhere mentioned. The enclosed table shows 2008 state populations estimated by the Census Bureau. It is ludicrous that Wyoming, with only 532,668 people should have representation in the Senate equivalent to California’s 36,756,666 citizens – unless you believe in states’ rights, which I don’t. I believe that a representative government should be based on the singular principle of one person, one vote, period.

We now have a single house Congress.

Second, I’m recommending that we reduce the number of Representatives from the current 435 to 304 – even though it will mean that some states will have to share Representatives. I don’t care, because I don’t believe that states have any right to be making laws. That 532,668 people have a whole state to themselves is irrelevant. The residents of Wyoming, our least populous state – including the District of Columbia – are citizens just like the rest of us, deserving of no more or less representation in Congress.

The average number of people represented by the current 435 Members of the House is 698,988 based on Census Bureau estimates of 2008 population. Based on those same estimates, our current population is just over 304 million. I’m recommending that we increase the number of people represented by a Member of the House to one million. 304 is a more manageable number which is still plenty large enough to assure independence and diversity.

Third, I recommend changing the term of our Representatives from two to six years, one third of them to be elected every two years – so that they’re not as distracted by the need to be constantly running for office.

We now have one President, nine Justices of the Supreme Court and just one house of 304 Representatives. Maybe we can get some work done.

If you’ll excuse me, I’ve got to call my children before they change cell phone numbers or enter the witness protection program. With luck, nobody will read this and everything will be fine.

-wf


Site Meter

Healthcare Legislation Quote of the Day

Monday, August 31, 2009

“Great innovations should not be forced on slender majorities.”
– Thomas Jefferson, 1808

So where is Mr. Jefferson now that we need him?

If you’re interested, here are some recent posts on the issue of healthcare reform legislation…

“A Bits and Pieces Approach to Healthcare Legislation”
(#1: Pre-Existing Conditions)

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #2: Overcharging the Uninsured”

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #3: Buying Prescription Drugs from Canadian Suppliers”

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #4: Coverage for Illegal Aliens”

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #5: Coverage for People Who Can’t Afford It”

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #6: Standardization of Forms”

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #7: Making Cigarettes Illegal”

“Obamination: The Fallacy of the Public Option”

-wf


Site Meter

“Bits and Pieces” Healthcare Legislation #7: Making Cigarettes Illegal

Sunday, August 30, 2009

This is the seventh installment in my “Bits and Pieces” series which is intended to encourage Congress to approach the objective of healthcare reform one issue at a time, rather than overwhelming itself and the American public in a ridiculous attempt to devise a single piece of all-encompassing legislation. Like this last sentence, it’s too complex, too much to do in a single breath.

This seventh topic isn’t part of the Obama Administration’s agenda for healthcare reform, but it should be. It’s certainly consistent with the spirit of healthcare reform, with the notion that it’s better to spend money keeping people healthy than wait and have to spend even more helping them get better – or worse, treating the likes of heart disease, lung cancer and emphysema.

Simply put, I want President Obama to endorse, and Congress to legislate the end of tobacco products, especially cigarettes, which extensive scientific research and the Surgeon General have long ago confirmed to be bad for our health.

It is a ridiculous contradiction we can no longer afford to accept that the same government that mandates the printing of serious health warnings on tobacco products would allow those products to be produced, sold and consumed. Why not do the same for hard drugs, legalize them as long as the manufacturers include an appropriate warning, or do the same for cribs and automobiles whose design defects might imperil our children or passengers? “It’s okay if it’s dangerous, as long as we warn people before they buy it,” is not supposed to be our government’s approach to protecting public health, the power and influence of any industry notwithstanding.

Smoking in public is already banned by many jurisdictions around the country. It’s high time we made it official.

We need to ask ourselves this simple question: Is it reasonable to ask all the American people to spend substantial amounts of their money to allow a minority to enjoy its addiction to smoking? Sound harsh? You bet, but who among us can rationalize continued tolerance for the adverse effects of smoking?

Medical insurance underwriters should be required to cover programs to help people stop smoking, and we need to do as much as we can, but no more than we should, to help the tobacco producers, related companies and the local economies dependent upon the sale of tobacco products transition to alternative, more healthy pursuits. But the sale and use of tobacco products has got to stop.

If you’re interested, here are some related posts…

“A Bits and Pieces Approach to Healthcare Legislation”
(#1: Pre-Existing Conditions)

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #2: Overcharging the Uninsured”

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #3: Buying Prescription Drugs from Canadian Suppliers”

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #4: Coverage for Illegal Aliens”

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #5: Coverage for People Who Can’t Afford It”

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #6: Standardization of Forms”

“Obamination: The Fallacy of the Public Option”

-wf

For additional reading… “$2.03 Trillion: How much are we willing to pay because some Americans need to smoke?” published on the Wordfeeder, December 8, 2009.


Site Meter

“Bits and Pieces” Healthcare Legislation #6: Standardization of Forms

Saturday, August 22, 2009

“Yes.” I mean, “Of course.” It’s obvious that there would be significantly greater efficiency were the government to mandate that medical insurance forms and the terms they use to document illness and facilitate payment be standardized. Likewise for medical records. If ever there was a “no brainer” in the march toward healthcare reform, this is it.

And yet, it remains undone. Why? Because it’s exactly like my friend and her kitchen. She won’t replace her refrigerator, even though it’s safer keeping perishables over one of her air conditioning vents, because she’s waiting until she can redo her entire kitchen all at once. One of the burners on her stove died months ago. Rather than replace it, the burner that is, she’s limping by with the remaining three until she can remodel the whole room. Oh, the floors in her condo, except for the bathroom, are hardwood, so she can’t refinish the kitchen without doing the floors in the whole place. You get the point. It’s all or nothing – and she can’t do it all, so it’s nothing.

Unfortunately, while that approach may be tolerable in my friend’s condo, when it comes to healthcare reform, failure to act, even on bits and pieces of the problem, is inexcusably expensive and, in fact, actually hurtful to the well being of our people. So what are the President and Congress waiting for? They’re waiting because they’ve got their heads so far up their tushes, blinded as they are by the glory of comprehensive, all encompassing healthcare reform legislation, that they’ve lost track of why we need this legislation in the first place. (If I have to spell it out for you, then you’re part of the problem.)

Breaking down the process of healthcare reform legislation into separate laws related to specific issues is the better way to do this. Problems, the solutions for which are easier to resolve, will get done, even while the President and Congress continue their debate on more esoteric, more politically charged legislation. In the meantime, we’ll be making progress. They’ll be less of the “You give me this, I’ll give you that” process that makes it so hard to form a majority consensus in both houses in support of complex legislation.

President Obama should take the leadership, should show the maturity and common sense intelligence to stop the current mess, and encourage individual issue legislation, “bits and pieces,” one problem at a time. But he’s not going to do that, because he doesn’t get it, because he’s forever campaigning and winning for him is more important that the fundamentals of what the legislation is intended to accomplish. The Democrats in Congress are, for the most part, useless. That leaves the Republicans to whom I offer two trite, but nonetheless applicable words of advice: Carpe diem, preferably in time to make it count for the 2010 elections.

If you’re interested, here are some related posts…

“A Bits and Pieces Approach to Healthcare Legislation”
(#1: Pre-Existing Conditions)

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #2: Overcharging the Uninsured”

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #3: Buying Prescription Drugs from Canadian Suppliers”

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #4: Coverage for Illegal Aliens”

“Bits and Pieces Healthcare Legislation #5: Coverage for People Who Can’t Afford It”

“Obamination: The Fallacy of the Public Option”

-wf


Site Meter