Health Care Reform Bill

So I was thinking about all the noise regarding healthcare...

At first, I couldn't understand why everyone was so upset and opposed to this plan. I was thinking that this was just part of some bipartisan politics and no matter what, the Republicans would not be happy with any kind of plan.

As far as my basic understanding of bipartisanship...and believe me...it's basic. Here's what I know...

So here goes...the Republicans, which are usually in most social aspects are mostly conservative. In the extreme...they are the conservative religious right. These are the folks that believe that they represent traditional family values. In the most basic politicial principals, the Republicans believe in as little gov't interference as possible and that it's the responsibility of the states to control most of their own legislation. They believe that too much gov't control, will stifle their right to free enterprise (in a business sense). They are afraid that if a large gov't has its hand in free enterprise, then it will start a slippery slope into socialism or worse commumism. Interesting.

Then you have the democrats. Democrates tend to be a more liberal in their social beliefs. Although most Democrats are liberal...some tend to be moderate in their beliefs. In their extreme...they are the opposite left of the Republicans right wing and can be (in the simplest of explanations) described as "tree huggers".  Democrats believe that the gov't should help the people. They believe that it's the gov't responsibility to pass legislation that help the total and not the few. The Democrats believe that if the gov't is not helping the people and have a hands off policy (in a business sense), then this will start a slippery slope of a society of the extremes...a few of those who have and many of those of have not. Interesting

Now I could be wrong...but this is the simplest explanation of my understanding of gov't.

So last Sunday I was watching Meet the Press...and the panel was discussing the passing of the Health Care Bill. Then one of the panelist made a very interesting comment. She said that all the uproar was not about the bill itself. But it was about the social changes that was entailed in the bill.

So then I thought about legislation in the past that designed to help the people, but it entailed some major social changes, i.e. Brown v. Bd of Education (this legislation ended segregation in public schools) and Roe v. Wade (this legislation made abortion legal in most states).

Now I figured that this bill was a no brainer. I mean today there are millions of people who do not have health insurance and our taxes are now covering the cost of their astronomical bills. In addition, I think that it is wrong that millions of people are being denied coverage due to preexisting health conditions. So what was the problem with this bill?

In addition, the panelists brought out that fact that this bill will cover all those without insurance. So here is the social question surrounding this bill...does that mean that millions of illegal immigrants will be covered under this policy? Does that mean that Americans will not have the option of private health insurance plans? Will this plan raise our taxes and hurt small businesses? Can this bill lead to too much gov't control and eventually to socialism?

So I was watching the show Real Tim with Bill Maher (who is very liberal democrat), he brought out a really good point...he said that for those who oppose this legislation, they believe that it's similar to welfare. They feel that it's a handout to those who haven't work for it. And in my experience, we Americans tend to believe that handouts are underserving. Maher came to this conclusion after viewing a clip of a man (suffering with Parkinson's Disease) was sitting in front of the White House advocating for the Health Care Bill and the protestors were screaming and swearing at him while throwing money and saying that he was asking for a handout. Interesting.

That goes back to my idea that Americans tend believe that if you cannot afford health insurance, than it's your problem. Some people believe that they have worked hard for they have...and if you don't...than it's your problem.

The answer is not so clear cut to me.

I think that people are entitled to health insurance. Its our fundamental rights and human beings. I also think that people are entitled to choice...and we should be able to choose whether or not we want public or private health plans. However, I don't like the idea of people being without insurance and having astronomical medical bills...it is inherently  wrong.

Finally, what disturbs me the most is extremism. The panelist on Meet the Press said that American do not like extremism and I totally agree. It was truly frightening to see the a few of the Republicans and others who disagreed with the bill screaming and inciting fear and violence. They were irresponsible with their responses and extreme with their actions.

I think that at this point in my life...I've become totally sick of Washington and its bipartisanship. I'm not a democrat nor a repubulican. Don't get me wrong, I love my country and I am a voter. However, I have become sadden by the state of our gov't and it knee jerk reactions. So I guess, in the end, we'll just have to wait and see what social changes this bill will bring about...

LBJ

So I was thinking about Lebron James and the big question....will LBJ stay in Cleveland? This is my quick answer..."Most definately yes, but maybe not forever..."

Here's why? First of all, the Cavs do not have a championship title to brag about. LBJ and the Cavs are the closest chance we have to achieving a title. I really don't think that he'll leave the Cavs until he has one.

Next, he's the big dog in our city. If he goes to another city like New York, he won't be the big dog. He'll be just another overpaid sports star in a huge city, plus he'll have the compete with the likes of Derek Jeter and A Rod.

It was also brought to my attention (thanks to ESPN or maybe it was WJW) that he if he's goes to another team, he will have to be part of their rebuilding process...and at this time, he's probably not interested in going down that road again...at least not for a while.

Right now, I believe that he has a lot of clout when it comes to choosing players for our team. He may not have that kind of influence if he's part of another franchise.

Then there is the important thing about money and contracts and all that other stuff. Now I'm not a sports agent and I don't pretend to understand how it works in the NBA. But the sportscaster (WJW) said something about Nike, money and contracts from other NBA teams...blah, blah, blah....but it ended with LBJ would benefit financially from staying with the Cavs...ok.

Finally, it's that little thing called loyalty. There's no loyalty in team sports today. Players follow the money...and maybe I don't blame them...But with LBJ, the city of Akron and (even Cleveland) and has been on his side since his very early days. LBJ talents were developed and nutured in Akron. So it's his obligation to pay the city and his fans back with some sort of loyalty (at least a little bit). But that's just my opinion. Go Cavs!!