RSS
More Feeds












God's Politics

My Reaction to Obama’s Speech? It’s a Start, but I Want More

by Valerie Elverton Dixon 09-10-2009

I am a voracious woman.

There was much in President Obama’s speech on health care that I appreciated. He has taken us a long way toward getting to a better health-care system. However, I wanted more. He spoke about regulations on insurance companies: they can no longer deny coverage for pre-existing conditions, drop coverage when people get sick, or put caps on coverage. The president spoke of putting limits on out-of-pocket expenses for people who already have health care and of requiring insurance companies to cover check-ups and preventive care.

I wanted more.

I wanted the president to say that the United States will finally join the rest of the industrialized world and disconnect basic health-insurance coverage from the profit motive. Health insurance companies make money by collecting premiums and paying claims. Now 20-30% of a dollar paid in premiums go to the administrative costs of insurance companies, including salaries, bonuses, and profits.

T.R. Reid, writing in his book, The Healing of America, reports: “healthcare economists around the world say that there’s a basic conflict between the principle of health insurance and the pursuit of profit.” I wanted more.

I wanted President Obama to say that health care is a human right and as such ought not to be subject to profit-making. I wanted him to say the insurance companies are welcome to make a profit on insurance for medical procedures that are not basic or lifesaving care — tummy tucks and such.

He spoke of the deficit neutrality of his proposals. He would find savings in Medicare and raise revenue with higher taxes on the rich. I wanted more. I want a consumption tax. I want us all to pay for health care through taxes on junk food, sugary drinks, alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and ammunition. In 10 years, when Medicare and Medicaid go bankrupt, we will have to revisit this issue. Perhaps by then the country will be ready for such a tax. However, by then, we will have to put the tax on everything.

President Obama called for mandates. Companies will have to insure employers and people who are self-employed will have to buy insurance. Mandates are necessary. But I want a strong public or a not-for-profit plan. I do not want my government to force me into the arms of the for-profit insurance companies.

Undocumented workers will not be covered by his plan. I wanted more. If health care is a human right, then it inheres in one’s humanity, not in citizenship or legal status. At the end of the speech, the president spoke of the character of the nation. His words were important and right. I still wanted more.

I want a universal single-payer system paid for through a consumption tax. I want privately owned and operated wellness centers in every neighborhood where people can see a primary care physician, learn meditation techniques, yoga, Tai Chi, and nutrition. I want the government to pay for this. I want dental and optical care paid for through this single-payer plan. I want my medical records on a life card. I want medical bills to go the way of dinosaurs.

I want liberty and justice for all to include health care.

Dr. Valerie Elverton Dixon is an independent scholar who publishes lectures and essays at JustPeaceTheory.com. She received her Ph.D. in religion and society from Temple University and taught Christian ethics at United Theological Seminary and Andover Newton Theological School.

To learn more about health-care reform, click here to visit Sojourners’ Health-Care Resources Web page.

Categories: Health, Human Rights
Share or bookmark this post:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Mixx
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
advertisement


Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

  • natcoz
    "Liberty and Justice for all."

    I find it incredibly amazing how the unintended truth behind these words, "Liberty" and "Justice," and the agenda they're being used to promote in this article, is the polar opposite of what they were intended to mean.

    You want health care to be more affordable? Are you tired of the greedy insurance companies making everything so expensive? The best place to start is to gain a better understanding of how things got to where they are now. This article explains some basic concepts that we desperately need to understand.

    http://www.lewrockwell.com/woods/woods71.html
  • arachne646
    We're talking about healthcare as a right of citizens. No other developed country has such a huge proportion of its citizens without access to health care (except on an emergency, last chance basis).In other civilized countries, the phenomenon of personal bankruptcy resulting from catastrophic medical expenses is absurd. Taken in total with the relatively poor health outcome statistics, and the high medical cost statistics, these practical facts suggest that your unique system of multiple, for-profit, insurance companies paying for most of your citizens health care is turning out to be bad for Americans, bad for your economy, but very good for insurance and allied health care companies. Single payer systems such as we have in Canada eliminate a huge dimension of cost and leave private care open to the "luxury" and cosmetic market, as in the UK. Justice demands that Americans have the right to healthcare that Canadians, French, British, Irish, Germans, and so many others do. Why don't you?
  • natcoz
    Did you read the link I posted?

    Justice demands it? Justice demands that gov't confiscate from some to give to others? Why don't I? Because I don't think it will work long term. That's why.

    The reason health care costs have risen out of control is because of gov't meddling....thus, personal bankruptcy in the face of medical bills.

    Regarding "the relatively poor health outcome statistics," are you talking about the WHO statistics? If so, I don't know why this keeps coming up, since they have been shown to be VERY misleading. Read up on it at www.cato.org.

    Once again, the best place to start is with a solid understanding of the mechanics of how things work. Gov't meddles, which causes problems justifying more gov't meddling and problems. Gov't systematic propaganda blames these gov't-created problems on the market and builds a case for more gov't intervention. When enough people buy the propaganda, the door is wide open for massive gov't intervention and eventual takeover of the system. It's a boon for both politicians and industry, but a total looser for the people. We're currently approaching that tipping point where a critical mass of people have bought the lie. I pray to God people wise up. There is much propaganda that needs to be unlearned, and much solid material that needs to replace it.
  • arachne646
    Yes, I read your link, but I disagree. We work together with our brothers and sisters to control government through an attempt at democracy (it's not perfect, but we try), so that in common, services like garbage collection, police services, and health services, can be carried out for everyone. People pay taxes for this because the community benefits, and we live together, not every man for himself. You may not think this is freedom, but the rest of the world feels sorry for Americans when they are injured or sick because the system looks at them like cash machines. Our system works for us. Good health to you!!
  • natcoz
    Gov't garbage collection? I haven't seen that one before. Where do you
    live?

    Control government? Are you talking about our government that regularly
    kills, maims, destroys, steals, and, for good measure, spies on the
    people? We brothers and sisters control government? How exactly is
    "democracy" keeping this thing "accountable?" Are you referring to the
    electoral process in which Americans recently had a choice between a
    pro-empire, pro-bailout, pro-war Republican and a pro-empire,
    pro-bailout, pro-war Democrat? (Yeah, I know Obama said he would bring
    an end to American involvement in Iraq/Afghanistan, but what did he end
    up doing?) Democracy has major flaws, but the propaganda glorifies it.
    The founding fathers refrained from creating a democracy for a reason,
    creating the federal gov't only with great fear and trepidation. And
    then, as they walked out, they said, "Well, you have a republic...if you
    can keep it." We couldn't. Their fears were well founded. Their
    hard-learned lessons have been forgotten. History repeats itself.

    You want to keep a CEO accountable? Stop buying his product. How do I
    stop buying the government's "product"? I can't, because the money to
    fund it is seized from me. It's not just that I don't like to pay taxes
    because I think that money is mine. It's more than that. I don't like
    what the gov't is doing with my money. But we have no control...not really.

    You may say, "So you think CEOs are being held accountable by their
    customers? Then why all the corruption?" Because, my dear arachne646,
    the issue here is the relationship between gov't and industry...a
    relationship which breeds corruption. The only solution is to keep
    gov't small. The larger the gov't, the larger the scope of this
    corruption-breeding relationship, and thus, the more corruption we must
    endure. You see, gov't doesn't keep industry honest and break up
    monopoly...quite the opposite. But take the gov't advantage away from
    industry, and industry will be forced to grapple with the reality of
    customer demands and a plethora of competitors all working to win the
    customer's over. This puts customers in charge instead of gov't.

    You say you read my link but disagree. Apparently your mind is so
    firmly made up that there is nothing more to be learned. If you were
    really in a truth-seeking state of mind, this conflicting information
    would give you pause for further thought and you wouldn't simply brush
    it aside.
  • arachne646
    I do agree with many of your assertions, but the topic is healthcare, and I assume we all hold the ideal of every American being able to obtain healthcare affordably. My contribution was, how this is done in Canada and in the UK. I look forward to discussing broader government and economic questions in another forum.
  • natcoz
    "I assume we all hold the ideal of every American being able to obtain
    healthcare affordably."

    A reasonable assumption. Affordable health care is indeed what I'm
    after. I believe it is VERY true that reform is needed.

    "My contribution was, how this is done in Canada and in the UK. I look
    forward to discussing broader government and economic questions in
    another forum."

    Our health care system's problems are inseparably connected with gov't
    and economics. Therefore, if our reform is to actually make things
    better, our perspective must be large enough to encompass the economics
    of the issue. We must understand economics and gov't interactions with
    it to find a solution that will help rather than hurt the situation.

    I'll operate on the assumption you are open-minded enough to search for
    truth rather than simply bashing other people's ideas...ideas which,
    even though you may not at first understand them, will actually provide
    valuable insight leading us to the best possible solution.

    Unfortunately, the health care problem has more complexity than most
    people are currently seeing. We need to change this, helping people see
    the bigger picture. I've looked objectively at the "single payer" idea,
    honestly considering if it might not be the best option. But in the
    end, my core, ethical principles steer me away from "single payer." On
    the other hand, I do agree with liberal doctors in favor of "single
    payer" who think Obama's "public option" plan would, in only a few
    years, make things far worse than they are now.

    In my personal search for answers, I came across an excellent article
    which spells everything out so clearly as to answer virtually any
    lingering question anyone may have....I think. Let me know if this is
    not true. I link to this article below.

    A word of hope. If you're looking for a clearer understanding of
    America's medical care delima, a perspective that will enable you to
    clearly see the cause of our crisis and also see the solution, this
    article WILL provide that for you. It's not just about refuting what's
    currently being offered, but explaining how we got where we are today
    and exactly the type of reform that will work.

    A couple words of caution concerning this article:

    First, if you're the type of person who intentionally avoids reading
    anything that may change your opinion, the first section may prevent you
    from reaching the really good part....the part with the solution. But
    if you skip, or cannot objectively consider the first section, you won't
    understand the solution presented. Our health care system does need
    reform, but we need to make sure we choose the best possible kind of
    reform, lest we make things worse. So if you can allow your ideas to be
    challenged, the benefit you will gain from this article will be
    substantial...and possibly extend to those around you.

    Second, this article is kinda long, though I'd still classify it as an
    article. But if you can persist, it's well worth the read.

    I highly encourage anyone interested in meaningful health care reform to
    read this article. It is definitely a worth while investment of your
    time. To proceed in this debate without understanding these concepts
    could prove to be detrimental to us all.

    http://mises.org/story/3613
  • "Affordable health care is indeed what I'm
    after." Many people wants a reform that's why the issue about the health care bill is still on the process
  • kansasmennonite
    If the govt didn't get involved in healthcare at all where would we be? How do you come to the conclusion that the reasons people have bankruptcies is because of govt involvment? A $50,000 surgery isn't going to go for $1000 is it? Can you imagine health insurance without any regulation?
  • natcoz
    kansasmennonite,

    You ask some very good questions:
    "How do you come to the conclusion that the reasons people have
    bankruptcies is because of govt involvment? A $50,000 surgery isn't
    going to go for $1000 is it? Can you imagine health insurance without
    any regulation?"

    You also seem to truly be looking for truth, rather than simply bashing
    other people's thoughts. And so, I'll make a few comments and provide
    you with one excellent resource. Thank you for searching for truth.

    Unfortunately, the problem has more complexity than most people are
    currently seeing. It is very true that reform is needed. I've looked
    objectively at the "single payer" idea, honestly considering if it might
    not be the best option. But in the end, I returned to core, ethical
    principles, which steer me away from "single payer." Also, I agree with
    liberal doctors who think Obama's "public option" plan would, in only a
    few years, make things far worse than they are now.

    The health care problem is, at it's core, an economic problem. Any
    reform we push through must work economically. Therefore, if our reform
    is to actually make things better, our perspective must be large enough
    to encompass the economics of the issue. In my personal search for
    answers, a came across an excellent article which spells everything out
    so clearly as to answer virtually any lingering question anyone may
    have....I think. Let me know if this assertion is untrue. I link to
    this article below.

    A word of hope. If you're looking for a clearer understanding of the
    medical care delima that will enable you to clearly see the cause of our
    crisis and also see the solution, this article WILL provide that for
    you. It's not just about refuting what's currently being offered, but
    explaining how we got where we are today and exactly the type of reform
    that will work.

    A couple words of caution concerning this article:

    First, if you're the type of person who intentionally avoids reading
    anything that may change your opinion, the first section may prevent you
    from reaching the really good part....the part with the solution. Our
    health care system does need reform, but we need to make sure we choose
    the best possible kind of reform, lest we make things worse. So if you
    can allow your ideas to be challenged, the benefit you will gain from
    this article will be substantial...and possibly extend to those around you.

    Second, this article is kinda long, though I'd still classify it as an
    article. But if you can persist, it's well worth the read.

    I highly encourage anyone interested in meaningful health care reform to
    read this article. To proceed in this debate without understanding
    these concepts could prove to be detrimental to us all. It is
    definitely a worth while investment of your time.

    http://mises.org/story/3613
  • natcoz
    kansasmennonite,

    You ask some very good questions:
    "How do you come to the conclusion that the reasons people have
    bankruptcies is because of govt involvment? A $50,000 surgery isn't
    going to go for $1000 is it? Can you imagine health insurance without
    any regulation?"

    You also seem to truly be looking for truth, rather than simply bashing
    other people's thoughts. And so, I'll make a few comments and provide
    you with one excellent resource. Thank you for searching for truth.

    Unfortunately, the problem has more complexity than most people are
    currently seeing. It is very true that reform is needed. I've looked
    objectively at the "single payer" idea, honestly considering if it might
    not be the best option. But in the end, I returned to core, ethical
    principles, which steer me away from "single payer." Also, I agree with
    liberal doctors who think Obama's "public option" plan would, in only a
    few years, make things far worse than they are now.

    The health care problem is, at it's core, an economic problem. Any
    reform we push through must work economically. Therefore, if our reform
    is to actually make things better, our perspective must be large enough
    to encompass the economics of the issue. In my personal search for
    answers, a came across an excellent article which spells everything out
    so clearly as to answer virtually any lingering question anyone may
    have....I think. Let me know if this assertion is untrue. I link to
    this article below.

    A word of hope. If you're looking for a clearer understanding of the
    medical care delima that will enable you to clearly see the cause of our
    crisis and also see the solution, this article WILL provide that for
    you. It's not just about refuting what's currently being offered, but
    explaining how we got where we are today and exactly the type of reform
    that will work.

    A couple words of caution concerning this article:

    First, if you're the type of person who intentionally avoids reading
    anything that may change your opinion, the first section may prevent you
    from reaching the really good part....the part with the solution. Our
    health care system does need reform, but we need to make sure we choose
    the best possible kind of reform, lest we make things worse. So if you
    can allow your ideas to be challenged, the benefit you will gain from
    this article will be substantial...and possibly extend to those around you.

    Second, this article is kinda long, though I'd still classify it as an
    article. But if you can persist, it's well worth the read.

    I highly encourage anyone interested in meaningful health care reform to
    read this article. To proceed in this debate without understanding
    these concepts could prove to be detrimental to us all. It is
    definitely a worth while investment of your time.

    http://mises.org/story/3613
  • kansasmennonite
    I will read it but just skimmed it so far and people need to be warned that it's a 1994 article written in response to the Clinton's healthcare initiative.
  • natcoz
    True, it was written in 1994. But the principles are timeless. Also,
    you'll see places were the current poster made updates to improve it's
    timeliness.
  • kansasmennonite
    Do you have any answers or just theories? Free markets without govt involvment is a pipe dream and I don't see how the free market would have any more "morals" than the govt. Should the gov't be out of protecting us from items that would kill us like drugs, pollution, bad food, etc.? Is Canada's system worse than ours? What other industrialized nation is worse than ours? Better?

    I could say that the problem with healthcare is our sin and not reliance on God but that won't solve our problems will it? We don't need theories but practical solutions.
  • natcoz
    You may call it theory, but I think of it as principle. Understanding
    basics, like the 10 Commandments, go a long way toward helping us find
    "answers." The article I linked does indeed have answers. And with a
    solid foundation of how Godly principles fit into gov't policy, we can
    see through the smoke of the debate and find the truth.

    "Free markets without gov't involvement is a pipe dream and I don't see
    how the free market would have any more "morals" than the gov't." I'm
    not trying to be rough on you, but this statement exposes your lack of
    understanding of how things really work. You've swallowed the
    propaganda. If you read some history on how things came to this point,
    you'll begin to see the truth.
  • letjusticerolldown
    I found this Bill Moyers segment with David Himmelstein and Sidney Wolfe helpful in understanding the single-payer option. www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05222009/watch2.html

    Agree or disagree with the proposal I think we need to have it on the table so we can understand the varied positions and assess what we want.

    Their explanation as to why the plan Obama wants is not on the table needs to be confronted (just as the reason tort reform is not on the table needs to be confronted).

    Their apologetic is a critique of our current system and the reform options currently being considered. They are friendly towards neither.

    I fear the current din in the public dialogue has an intentional or unintended purpose. It is not to simply defeat the opposition. It is not to prove the other position wrong. It is to create a massive fog that obfuscates what is going on--and when the system collapses and the smoke clears, they can all stand up and point the finger at the opposition. To a degree I share the passion of the Tea Parties. But our passion must be for that which is true and just; for a spirit of love and soundness of mind. Not to attack one side of the debate.

    If Obama is truly for the best ideas from both sides--why isn't he offering his own?
  • letjusticerolldown
  • JacobS
    Where did all that talk about mandates in last night's speech come from? I thought Obama's opposition to mandates was what distinguished his healthcare plan from Hillary's. I've heard the idea kicked around but this was the first I'd heard about Obama's support for it.

    And I'm sure there are some lawyers out there, so I'll ask them: is it at all likely that an individual mandate won't be struck down by the courts? I've done a little bit of looking around and it looks like a tough sell. I wouldn't expect this Court to further expand the powers granted by the commerce clause.
  • Ngchen
    The individual mandate has drawn much commentary from legal commentators, and they're split on whether it's constitutional. Its defenders point to government's broad powers to tax what it wants, and that the mandate can be construed as a tax.
  • JacobS
    Even when its paid directly to a private corporation? That seems to me the equivalent of requiring me to buy an hp laptop next year. I am by no means a supporter of single payer, but at least that would be a legitimate tax. I can't buy that argument, but I guess it they only have to convince five people anyway.
blog comments powered by Disqus
click here for comments tech support
advertise here
  • MOST VIEWED
  • MOST COMMENTED
  • MOST RECENT
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here


HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE  
SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US  
Sojourners | 3333 14th Street NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010  
Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net  
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2008