I was working on a review of Jamie Oliver’s Food Revolution, but Hulu is being persnickety. So I leave you with a definition to ponder:
OLIGARCHY: noun a government in which a small group exercises control especially for corrupt and selfish purposes; also : a group exercising such control.
We are supposed to have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Not an oligarchy.
Veronica (3)
kat (2)
Kristin (2)
Raso @ lasagnarec... (2)
drew (1)
Elise (1)
Grandma Margie (1)
Heather (1)
{ 13 comments… read them below or add one }
And you think this is a recent development? Are you saying that we are currently being led by one or what? Can you tell me why you think so?
I’m just not getting all the vitrol. Not just here but all over. I guess I’m not sure if this is a good place to start or not but, I respect your opinion and I respect your blog. What do you think should be happening?
I posted the definition of oligarchy because it seems that is where our government is heading. The people did not want this bill. Obama lied about transparency, making the bill available 5 days beforehand, and posting sessions on C-SPAN. Instead, it was a select group of cronies hiding in backrooms and cutting deals like the Cornhusker Kickback and the Louisiana Purchase.
I know politics has always been tit for tat, but this is bribery and back scratching on an entirely new scale. The healthcare legislation is supposed to fundamentally change a lot of things about America. Nancy Pelosi scoffs and refuses to answer to the people – when asked by what authority the federal government can compel people to purchase a product from a private company under threat of imprisonment, she ignores the question.
Most of our current leaders (Democrats AND Republicans) are just doing what they want, people be damned. And they are hiding what they are doing.
So, yes, I think that there is a small, elite group of career politicians who are wheeling, dealing, blackmailing, and pressuring everyone else to go along with what they want, without input or transparency to the citizens they supposedly represent.
Here’s a link to the Rasmussen polling results; you can Google it to find others.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform
Also, this healthcare bill will force people of conscience to fund abortions, because federal funding of abortions is included in the bill. Abortion already divides this country; prolife advocates believe that life begins at conception and abortion ends the life of a unique human being. The federal government is compelling people to pay for the killing of innocent lives, future citizens, under threat of penalty from the IRS. This is a very serious matter. Politicians and pundits are openly calling the abortion issue the “slavery of our times”, alluding to the moral issues that inflamed the civil war. People are openly speaking of nullification and secession. Lt. Governors are issuing open calls for a state called Constitutional Convention, which has never happened in US history.
Our government is in crisis.
I definitely see what you’re getting at in this post. I agree that we are very close to an oligarchy, if not one already. The tragedy is these people are elected and re-elected rather than receiving their power due to birth/nobility. If we have an oligarchy, I think a majority of it is our fault. The behavior of those elected is not, though, and those elected officials should do their real job and represent their electorate.
I have to say that the constant gerrymandering contributes to the re-election. And I fully support the True The Vote movement, to make sure elections are fair. Some friends of mine were poll watchers for a local primary and the people that were supposed to be working the polls were violating voting laws. I’ve heard stories of people (in this district) coming in and asking the workers to fill out their ballot, of saying “my mom couldn’t make it so I’m going to vote for her” and being allowed, and even, on this day, being told that they could only vote for one party, that the other party wasn’t there (even though there was Republican and Democratic primary voting going on.)
Okay, I understand the abortion issue and I’ll give you that one. I know that having an abortion is not an easy decision and I doubt that that portion of the bill means that doctors will be performing abortions willy-nilly on perfectly healthy babies and women. Want to stop abortions? Educate.
Once reform is fully implemented, 94% of Americans will have health insurance coverage. Health Insurance companies will no longer be allowed to deny coverage or drop sick people – this is a big one for me. As for jailing people, from what I’ve read they will be fined at 1% of the first 95% of their income, and only jailed if they don’t pay the fine. In my state, if I have a driver’ license and no insurance, I’m fined as well and my license is revoked. How would you propose they deal with people without Health Insurance who don’t pay their bills?
When I hear that “the people didn’t want it” I have to disagree. I wanted it. Or something like it. Actually, I want more. I do not see the problem with a large portion of the bill. At least not what is causing so much hate and discontent? Yes, it will cost money . . . but do you think that Health Care is so cheap now? And it’s only going up. If I or my son have any major illness it’s game over for me and I have coverage – the best my 5000 employee company offers. I do not like having my health coverage tied up in my employment. I know people who died of cancer who worked up until the day they died because their Health coverage was tied up in their employment. That’s not fair to the employer or the employee. I can’t tell you the number of people I know who stay with an employer just for the Heath coverage. If they could get it, guaranteed, on their own, they would have the freedom to work for a small business are start up their own companies. I want choice. This bill doesn’t get me there but it’s a start.
Anyways . . .What do you propose? Do you feel the previous system was working?
Janet,
The problem is not that doctors will suddenly be willy nilly performing abortions. The problem is that federal funds will be paying for it and not only that, my funds will be paying for it in a personal way in that I will be UNABLE to purchase a health insurance plan that excludes abortion. So my personal dollars will also be subsidizing abortion in addition to tax payer dollars, neither of which are conscionable.
I am interested to know why do you think education will stop abortions? I don’t think it will, at all. What kind of education?
And how would that education be implemented, when bills such as requiring abortionists to make ultrasounds available to women, aren’t passed? Isn’t that education?
Jailing people, exactly. You could feasibly be imprisoned for not having the right kind of healthcare. If I do not want to purchase an insurance policy that pays for abortions out of premiums, the IRS will crack down on me. If my single, childless brother in law does not want to have maternity coverage and refuses to buy it, he could be jailed. The penalty is on the table.
By “the people” I meant in a general sense. There are a great many people who do want this reform. But there are more who do not.
What do I propose, I’m not sure. I just know that this monster of a bill will only make things worse. Penalizing 10% of doctors for referring to specialists won’t improve quality of care. Forcing people to buy vision coverage (for example) will take away resources that they may have been able to use to actually improve their lives. How can the government demand that I have vision coverage???
Some things I think would HELP our system:
Pricing transparency. It would help people make better treatment decisions and allocate their resources better if they knew what the price was. There should be clear, fair price disclosure (like motels, stores, and other professionals have.)
Increased competition – being able to buy health insurance from out-of-state carriers. That sounds like a good idea to me.
Separating health insurance from employment. Buying coverage as an individual is expensive, but if you get laid off, you’re out of luck. Why can’t people form community groups/shared interest groups and buy insurance together? Why can people buy insurance together if they have employment at, say, AT&T in common but NOT if they both attend the same church or both race go-karts, or whatever?
I also think that a good hard look at our current Farm Bill would have drastic effects on our healthcare spending, but that’s an entirely different subject! But it makes no sense to subsidize high fructose corn syrup, which a recent study showed caused more weight gain than sugar, and then whine that there’s not enough money to combat obesity.
I also wonder how many people know that the whole no-more-preexisting-conditions for kids isn’t going to work out. Insurance companies can’t refuse to cover pre-existing conditions, but they CAN refuse to cover the child altogether! So now instead of health insurance for everything except XYZ condition, they’ll have no coverage at all.
We have/had Medicaid. It is a horrible mess, a maze of confliciting paperwork, recertifications, months long delays in benefits, and more. I fear that’s what everyone’s healthcare will look like. Right now we don’t have coverage at all because they are backed up on recerts; we only had coverage for 2 out of the prior 6 months because of certification delays (they retroactively covered us for those months, but since they don’t reimburse ever i still paid out of pocket and was not able to visit the doctor.)
Also I have not addressed the issue of it is unconstitutional for our FEDERAL government to be handling this at all. They do not have the authority. The states have almost always handled health care issues, even now the states are the ones administering Medicaid, licensing hospitals, and so on. The federal government can’t make us buy things from other people. The federal government has no authority to regulate commerce by FORCING commerce.
I have never heard of the True The Vote movement. I don’t know if gerrymandering is completely to blame here, though. I think that a majority of voters are clueless that they can elect someone other than an incumbent. Or, for that matter, that their incumbent could be one of these oligarchical politicians.
Here’s a link to True the Vote: http://truethevote.com
They are training people to be pollwatchers and are non-partisan working for fair elections.
Amen! I’m still fuming about this bill passing. I think you hit the nail on the head–oligarchy sounds all too appropriate.
{ 1 trackback }