The Supreme Court says we’re exactly the same. I can lobby government (no, my letters aren’t answered), and you can lobby government (yes, your voice is well heard and followed). I can buy TV commercials for my favorite politician (yeah, no I can’t), and now you can too (yes you can). I can pay income taxes and payroll taxes and sales taxes (yes I do), and you can… (yeah, you don’t have to do that). Like they said, we’re exactly the same.
Today between about 11:30 and 12:30, US Congressman Lloyd Doggett spoke and answered questions about healthcare reform. He had just finished a closed door talk at a local clinic. Senator John Cornyn, who was also at the closed door talk, ducked out, preferring not to talk to his constituents. Nice, Senator, nice. Rep. Doggett let various sides speak from the microphone. Doggett supports the Obama plan. The crowd was mixed, though most were in favor of the Obama plan or something more. Most were also in favor of a single-payer plan. I didn’t get to speak from the podium, but I did get to talk to Rep. Doggett for a minute afterwards expressing my support for the Wyden-Bennett bill.
While I am still a huge fan of Ezekiel Emanuel’s health care plan, it is clearly not on the radar screen of Congress (at least in whole). The best health care legislation currently on offer is the Wyden-Bennett bill. Unfortunately, it suffers from the same problem as the Emanuel plan… it gets rid of the need for employer-based health insurance. Who has a problem with this? Not me. My super-Democrat, big time OCAW-man, father would not have had any problem with such a separation at all. But one group, UNION LEADERS, have a problem with it (those that have the ears of Democratic leaders). It removes one of the main reasons for their fight. Sure, it is because their constituents would have won the fight. But all of us would have won. God forbid. It seems that the AFL-CIO and other union leaders have abandoned the movement for the people in favor of the people leading the movement, themselves. Mob-like behavior to be sure.
Democracy for Iran
Marching to the Capitol
Iranian Democracy in Texas
The people involved in this march and protest were displaying their sympathies with the reformers in Iran. More than anything, these people (including myself) wanted and want democracy and freedom for the people of Iran.
Iran wants Change
Protester Warns About Mousavi
While most protesting were in support of Mousavi, a few warned that there is really no difference between Mousavi and Ahmedinejad. They were both selected by the Supreme Leader. Clearly all assembled expressed support for real democracy and real freedom in Iran.
Supporters of democracy in Iran gathered yesterday (Sunday, June 14) in Austin, at Sixth and Lamar (in front of Waterloo Records), to protest what is believed to be a de facto coup d’etat in Iran, where the establishment overthrew the will of the people. I was there between 2:30 and 3:30. It started before I got there, and continued after I left. One of the common chants was “what we want.. ELECTION, .. what we got.. COUP D’ETAT“. Most of the supporters assembled were of Iranian descent. Many were students at the University of Texas. It was a peaceful, family-friendly gathering of people that love Iran, and love democracy. There was talk that there may be another gathering Wednesday at the Capitol.
Austin Supports Iranian Democracy
Gathering at Sixth and Lamar
After talking to a senior research fellow of a major Washington think tank yesterday, I learned that my preferred healthcare reform plan, health insurance vouchers, has gotten so little discussion because it was ruled out by politicians early on as a non-starter. Contrary to the claim on the healthcare reform chart I produced (i.e. the current version of it — I may revise it) that there were no likely opponents to insurance vouchers, there are actually two significant opponents: union organizers (not necessarily union members) and a certain group of uninvolved wealthy people. Apparently, even though health insurance vouchers would greatly benefit union members (it would get health insurance off the bargaining table – which is the most common reason for strikes – and it would save many of their jobs by making their companies more competitive internationally), some union organizers cynically want to maintain points of fissure thinking their existence needs such justification. Apparently, Clark Kent has no reason to be Superman if there is no Joker. Union organizers (who supposedly speak for union members to public officials) control the union purse-strings that Democratic candidates are attached to. On the other hand, many uninvolved wealthy people that have no real stake in the ownership or governance of American companies and corporations often see no benefit in a general (non-food)VAT tax replacing their currently tax deductable health insurance premiums as the funding mechanism for their personal health insurance policy, thinking that a new sales tax on that yacht they want to buy might be more expensive than their current government subsidized health insurance premium. Of course, those wealthy people that are involved in ownership and governance of employing companies know that getting out of the healthcare business would be the biggest boon to their competitiveness. As someone put it, the uncompetitive and now hospitalized GM is really just a healthcare company that makes a few cars on the side. Uninvolved wealthy people are significant campaign contributors to both Republican and Democratic candidates. This is so damned frustrating!!! What a godless political system we have.
The take away… we REALLY need campaign finance reform. If campaigns were publicly financed, the candidates (and then legislators) could not be swayed by private campaign contributions, and would as a result have no master but the people. The interest of their constituents would then trump the interest of sugar-daddy Washington lawyers. If the public interest were king, health insurance vouchers would not have been placed off the table, and would currently be seen as the obvious and best solution to our healthcare crisis in America.
It’s a good question. Others may have other definitions, but for our purposes a COMMONER is someone that either is, or is an advocate for, the common man (note I am being old school here, using the inclusive masculine). A commoner is someone that is conscious of, and works for the progress of, the common good; someone that seeks the best for the most, starting at the bottom. There is no formulaic prescription for solutions implied in the term. A commoner is not a communist, nor a corporatist.
Some other relevant definitions:
Christian Democracy – a political ideology and movement that began in large measure as a response to the anti-Christian and anti-cultural nature of the French Revolution and Marxism on the one hand, and the anti-worker and anti-social nature of Social Darwinism and laissez-faire capitalism on the other. It is distinct from Christianity as a religion, and most Christian democratic parties today do not have a religious criterion for membership or service. Christian democracy as an ideology is a form of communitarianism. It is a political philosophy focusing on the health of the community in all areas of community existence. This community orientation is often considered right-leaning in regard to moral and cultural issues and left-leaning in regard to social justice, labor and socio-economic issues. Christian democratic parties generally claim a strong social conscience, in the sense of great respect for the dignity of the human person from conception to natural death, emphasizing the alleviation of poverty, and maintenance of a basic level of societal protection keeping the weak from abandonment and destitution, and the regulation of market forces for the common good (advocating a “social market economy”). It may also be seen as liberal as it upholds human rights and individual initiative (read personal responsibility). It may be seen as federalistic and traditional in that it emphasizes sphere sovereignty and subsidiarity, and maintaining local and regional cultural distinctives, as well as upholding universal traditions. It may be seen as green in that it advocates positive stewardship of the creation, especially through using renewable energy, and avoiding activities that destroy the environment. Christian democracy is a significant force in the political mainstream of Europe and Latin America, but is less common on other continents. Christian democratic parties in Latin America are generally more inclined to be on the center-left regarding economics, while their European counterparts tend to be closer to the political center, or center-right, on economic issues.
Christian Democrat – someone that advocates Christian Democracy, or is a member of a Christian democratic party; in the American context the term is sometimes used in reference to Christian members of the Democratic Party, though this is a misuse of the term (largely due to ignorance of the term in the American political scene) — note that in the American context a Christian Democrat is equally likely to be a member of either the Democratic or Republican parties, or no party at all (given the de facto binary choice offered by the system)
Pilgrim Progressive – a term I use (coined by me?) to refer to someone that could have been a follower of William Jennings Bryan at the turn of the 20th century; someone that is progressive but not liberal (according to the original meaning of that term); someone that is a commoner (as previously defined here) motivated by Christian or other religious belief; for example if someone were a Jew or Muslim progressive that advocated universal health care, a living wage (and other economic freedom measures), and was pro-life on abortion, that person might consider himself a “pilgrim progressive”; the term intentionally plays off the title of John Bunyan’s wonderful classic Pilgrim’s Progress, and intentionally makes reference to the first American settlers that sought religious freedom and societal progress from a Puritan perspective
Catholic Social Teaching – a body of teachings that have grown in tandum with Christian Democracy; they are official teaching of the Catholic Church, but they are amenable to and embraceable by Christians of all stripes (I say this as a non-Roman Catholic — and a Calvinistic Baptist), and non-Christians as well; a set of social teachings that begin with the principles of human dignity, solidarity, and subsidiarity; the teachings were first understood as such from the encyclical letter of Pope Leo XIII called Rerum Novarum
This is absolutely the BEST PLAN for healthcare reform in America! I will have more to say about this later, but it can’t be explained better than this speech by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the designer of this plan.
SPEECH, PART 1 OF 3
SPEECH, PART 2 OF 3
SPEECH, PART 3 of 3
Q & A, PART 1 of 3
Q & A, PART 2 of 3
Q & A, PART 3 of 3
