The Alligator

Senator John McCain says we might be in Iraq for 100 years. In his swan song- well at least until 2012- Governor Mitt Romney said he was leaving the race because the party needed to unite in order to defeat the Democrats and he felt that staying in and allowing the Democrats to have an opportunity to “win” would be complicit in aiding a surrender to terror. The surge is working they say. Sure it is! The reason for the surge was to give the Iraqi government some breathing room to get its act together. It hasn’t. So, DUH, there is less violence because we have more troops there. You don’t need a PhD to figure out that math, but I guess it takes someone other than a Conservative to understand that less violence does not equal success. Unless political progress is made- the surge hasn’t worked.

But that “surge myth” is only part of the story that makes the idea of continuing our folly in Iraq more than absurd- but an INCREDIBLY dangerous enterprise.

A classified Pentagon assessment concludes that long battlefield tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with persistent terrorist activity and other threats, have prevented the U.S. military from improving its ability to respond to any new crisis according to a report from the Associated Press on February 8, 2008. Despite security gains in Iraq, there is still a “significant” risk that the strained U.S. military cannot quickly and fully respond to another outbreak elsewhere in the world, according to the report.

According to Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell at a House hearing on Thursday, a new influx of Western recruits – including American citizens – are being trained in Al Qaeda camps in Pakistan. These recruits would be able to more easily enter and move about the US than foreign operatives.

“Al Qaeda is improving the last key aspect of its ability to attack the US: the identification, training, and positioning of operatives for an attack on the homeland,” wrote Mr. McConnell in prepared Congressional testimony.

Over the years, Mr. McConnell reported that al-Qaeda has lost its Afghanistan training camps, and much of its senior leadership, including key operational planners. But Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants have been able to retreat to the sanctuary of Pakistan’s wild border areas, while drawing on a bench of skilled operatives to replace members that have been killed or captured.

McConnell reported that Al-Qaeda’s ability to reconstitute and retain a base of operations in Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) has been a major setback to counterterror efforts, admit intelligence officials. The FATA has given the group many of the advantages it once took from its bases in Afghanistan. The region has served as a staging area for Al Qaeda attacks in Afghanistan, as well as a base for training operations.
Pakistan remains in political turmoil following the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. Its security forces are thought to number many Al Qaeda and Taliban supporters.

Al-Qaeda in Iraq has been in the past a formidable enemy in that country bu this has been a year of major setbacks, with hundreds of its members killed and facilities destroyed. But unlike Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda organization in Pakistan, U.S. intelligence officials and outside experts believe, the Iraqi branch poses, or has ever posed, little danger to the security of the U.S. homeland.

Attacking the United States clearly remains on bin Laden’s agenda. But the likelihood that such an attack would be launched from Iraq, many experts contend, has sharply diminished over the past year as al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) has undergone dramatic changes. Once believed to include thousands of “foreign fighters,” it is now an overwhelmingly Iraqi organization whose aims are likely to remain focused on the struggle against the Shiite majority in Iraq, U.S. intelligence officials said.

And of course there was that moment of eloquence and clarity from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice when she described the NATO-led military mission in Afghanistan as “bumpy”.

It is beyond my comprehension how any person with a brain could think that continuing this folly is Iraq is making us safer. On the contrary even some of those “experts” that the administration looks to in order to sell its Iraq policy are stating that we are not in safer, our military is stretched, al-Qaeda has reconstituted and is more of a threat, and the situation is- to quote Ms. Rice- “bumpy”.

It is astonishing to me that Senator McCain- a bone fide war hero- would be so clueless about the effect that this policy is having on the safety of the nation and the strength and responsiveness of our military. He drank the Neo-Conservative Kool-Aid.

And if Senator McCain wants to support the troops, maybe he should listen to the troops. According to The Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks campaign cash, looks at the 2007 money-raising In the 4th quarter of 2007, individuals in the Army, Navy and Air Force made those branches of the armed services the No. 13, No. 18 and No. 21, contributing industries, respectively. War opponent Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, received the most from donors in the military, collecting at least $212,000 from them. Another war opponent, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Illinois, was second with about $94,000.

Is anyone listening to the troops? Obviously “supporting our troops” doesn’t include listening to them. And clearly waging an absurd war in Iraq is clearly more important to the Republican party- and Senator McCain- than actually making our nation safe and actually defending the nation against terrorism.

I have a message to Governor Romney and Senator McCain- if you really want to do what’s best for our nation- vote for either Senator Obama or Senator Clinton, doing otherwise will surely put our nation in peril- and that would be shameful.

Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) is being drummed from office by his party. As I wrote in my last post- there is no doubt in my mind that Craig is a closet case, but I still feel that being arrested for making gestures that are associated with soliciting sex in a rest room but are not necessarily soliciting sex is absurd. Have we suddenly become a society where the thought police can arrest us- because they know what we are thinking? I thought that only the federal government with powers granted to it through the Patriot Act was the only entity that could arrest you for what you are assumed to be thinking. 

I’ve said before that I want the hypocrite to squirm and I am not unhappy to see him go from the Senate although who knows what nut bag yahoo Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter (R-ID) will name as the new Senator. You can bet we won’t be seeing a re-make of “Mr. Smith Goes To Washington”! Otter’s voting record when he was a member of Congress is pretty much what you would expect from an gun totin’ red neck – a loyalist to President Bush. Progressive is not an adjective one would associate with Otter. So- the chances of a decent replacement are pretty slim.

But I don’t think that Craig should have been drummed out of office by his GOP pals. I reiterate- he didn’t do anything that rose to guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Although Craig’s behavior was suspicious- do we arrest people for suspicious behavior? Apparently we do!  But if this had gone to court I don’t think it would have passed the laugh test. In these circumstances the police tend to bully people into pleading- playing on their fears and insecurities. I find this sort of police work reprehensible. I would hope that the police have better things to do with their time than men’s room sting operations unless they assume that a pedophilia ring is operating out of that particular location.

Yet- one after another GOP members of the House and Senate and the party’s presidential candidates called for Craig to resign. Mitt Romney had to come out (no pun intended) and say something, no matter how ill thought out or how inane because he has to position himself as a social conservative. Quite frankly I don’t think Romney has any particular compass to lead him on social issues other than the wind. He’ll say anything he things people want to hear in order to get elected. Senator John McCain (R-AZ) was quick to say that his call for Craig to resign had nothing to do with Craig being gay rather- if a member of a senate pleads guilty to a crime- than he should resign.

Sorry Senator McCain, I just don’t buy that. I could be wrong- but I think that visiting a prostitute is considered a crime. Senator Vitter (R-LA) admitted to that act- but he wasn’t drummed out of the Senate.  He wasn’t even reprimanded- as was Congressman Barney Frank in 1990 when he admitted to receiving the services of a male prostitute. Although his actions were creepy, technically Representative Tom Foley did nothing illegal- but he too was forced out of office when it was divulged that he had written suggestive messages to Congressional pages and former pages all of whom were older than the age of consent.

If the GOP is drumming out elected officials because they are hypocrites and their personal life is inconsistent with their policy positions – there would be few members of the GOP – but there would certainly have been pressure for Senator Vitter to resign.  If they sought resignation from elected officials for being guilty of a crime- then Vitter should have been terminated as well.  Although he didn’t technically plead guilty to a crime in a court of law or to a police officer, he did admit his guilt to the world  Is there really a difference?

So why is it that Craig must go and Vitter can remain? Two reasons come to mind.

First is that that Republican Party is the party of homophobia. It is okay to have sexual peccadilloes if you are not gay or if you aren’t named Bill Clinton. Just look at the homophobic positions of the GOP presidential candidates. They hate gay people- pure and simple. There is no debate- the GOP does not welcome gay people. I give credit to the Log Cabin Republicans for trying and trying and trying to get an invitation to a club that clearly doesn’t want them (thank you Groucho Marx).

Second is pure politics- cynical ugly politics. Vitter is from a state that has a Governor who is a Democrat. He would likely appoint a Democrat and giving a wider margin of majority to the Dems. Craig is from Idaho where there is no chance in hell that Governor “Butch” will appoint anything but some Republican from the Neanderthal wing of the party.   So there is nothing to lose by asking Craig to go, while there might have been a lot to lose by booting Vitter.

Is any of this surprising? Sadly it isn’t.

Is it cheesy for me to jump on the “Live Earth” bandwagon today by writing a piece about gloabal warming? Hell no. It is critical, it is essential, it is vital, it is life and death for our planet. Did my redundancy get your attention yet?

We know that the earth has become warmer over the last century. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a group established by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), reports that the average surface temperature of the earth has increased during the twentieth century by about 0.6° ± 0.2°C. (The ± 0.2°C means that the increase might be as small as 0.4°C or as great as 0.8°C.)

This may seem like a small shift, but although regional and short-term temperatures do fluctuate over a wide range, global temperatures are generally quite stable. In fact, the difference between today’s average global temperature and the average global temperature during the last Ice Age is only about 5 degrees C. Indeed, it’s warmer today around the world than at any time during the past 1000 years, and the warmest years of the previous century have occurred within the past decade.

We also know that human activities—primarily the burning of fossil fuels—have increased the greenhouse gas content of the earth’s atmosphere significantly over the same period. Carbon dioxide is one of the most important greenhouse gases, which trap heat near the planet’s surface.

The vast majority of climate researchers agree with these overall findings. The scientific disagreements that do still exist primarily concern detailed aspects of the processes that make up these largely accepted general themes.

Climate change is one of the most complex issues that the world will face in this century.  Concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere have already reached unprecedented levels, causing changes in global temperature and observable impacts throughout the world, and these changes are happening more quickly than expected.  Stabilizing greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations will require a fundamental shift in our energy system, but this transition will have other benefits as well, including improved competitiveness, security, air quality, public health, and job creation. This transition will not be easy, but it is crucial to begin now.

In February 2006 The Pew Center on Climate Change issued an “Agenda for Climate Action”. The Pew Center on Global Climate Change was established by the Pew Charitable Trusts to bring a new cooperative approach and critical scientific, economic, and technological expertise to the global climate change debate. We intend to inform this debate through wide-ranging analyses that will add new facts and perspectives in four areas: policy (domestic and international), economics, environment, and solutions.

This Pew Center’s Agenda attempts to articulate a responsible course of action for addressing climate change. It identifies 15 actions that should be started now, including U.S. domestic reductions and engagement in the international negotiation process. While reductions across sectors and sources of emissions is key, the steps listed here are not likely to happen simultaneously, nor without costs. However, these recommendations have been designed to be both cost-effective and comprehensive.

I big caveat here- I am not a scientist and I have never done a lot of research on global climate change outside of news articles and visiting some of the websites on both sides of this debate and of course I saw “An Unconveniant Truth. Thanks to the internet to we all have amazing access to research and information on every side of this issue- although I really don’t think that there are many sides to this issue anymore –on one side you have science and on the other side you have— I don’t know what to call them—- NUTS?

I have done a little investigating and find that the Pew Agenda is probably the most thoughtful and sound report I could find without spending months, if not years, reading every report posted on the web with an agenda for climate change. I have Pew for other research for pieces on this blog and have found their information to be nonpartisan, based in science and most importantly upheld by many other sources.

Here is a synopsis of the Pew Report’s 15 reccomendations in its Agenda for Climate Action.

Invest in science and technology research.

1. Ensure a robust research program through the Climate Change Science Program.

2. Offer long-term, stable funds—in the form of a reverse auction—to GHG-related technology research and development.

Establish mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions and harness market mechanisms for economy-wide reductions

3. Create a mandatory GHG reporting system as a basis for an economy-wide emissions trading program.

4. Implement a large-source, economy-wide cap-and trade program for greenhouse gases.

Stimulate innovation across key economic sectors.

5. Transportation: Convert the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program into strengthened, tradable corporate average emissions standards. Support biofuels, hydrogen, and other low-GHG fuel alternatives.

6. Manufacturing: Provide outreach and incentives to manufacturers for improvements in industrial efficiency and low-GHG technologies, and support the production of low-GHG products.

7. Agriculture: Raise the priority and funding levels for Farm Bill programs and other federal initiatives on carbon sequestration.

Drive the energy system toward greater efficiency, lower-carbon fuels and carbon capture technologies.

8. Coal and Carbon Sequestration: Provide funding for tests of geologic carbon sequestration and for research, development and demonstration (RD&D) projects on separation and capture technologies, in combination with advanced generation coal plants. Establish an appropriate regulatory framework for carbon storage.

9. Natural Gas: Expand natural gas transportation infrastructure and production.

10. Renewables: Significantly “ramp up” renewables for electricity and fuels, including an extension/expansion of the production tax credit, a uniform system for tracking renewable energy credits, and increased emphasis on biomass.

11. Nuclear Power: Provide opportunities for nuclear power to play a continuing role in a future low carbon electricity sector.

12. Efficient Energy Production and Distribution: Support the development and use of combined heat and power installations, distributed generation technologies, and test beds for an upgraded electricity grid.

13. Efficient Energy Usage: Reduce energy consumption through policies that spur efficiency, including appliance/equipment standards, building R&D and codes, and consumer education.

Begin now to adapt to the inevitable consequences of climate change.

14. Develop a national adaptation strategy through the Climate Change Science Program and Climate Change Technology Program, and fund development of early-warning systems for related threats.

Engage in negotiations to strengthen the international climate effort.

15. Review options for a new or modified agreement to ensure fair and timely action by all major emitting countries, and participate in negotiations to establish binding climate commitments consistent with domestic interests.

While these fifteen recommendations are not the only means of achieving a lower carbon future, but taken together, they chart a climate-friendly path for the United States. Putting the Agenda into practice will take political will and policy action. All recommendations require government leadership and private sector commitment and time. Nonetheless, the details of specific recommendations in this Agenda are less critical than the compelling need to get started. Further delay will only make the challenge before us more daunting and costly.

If you want to know what you can do- and to make a commitment and take a pledge to do what you can do personally go to www.liveearth.org  

The Republicans have been portraying Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi as a bogey man that is going to aid the terrorists, hand over the country to “illegals” and gays, and raise everyone’s taxes. 

I am one of Mrs. Pelosi’s constituents and I have had the privilege of working with her office on numerous occasions in my work in health policy and planning as well as AIDS advocacy.  I also had the honor to have dinner with Mrs. Pelosi once which was a remarkable evening. 

Congresswoman Pelosi is fair, she wouldn’t dream of raising taxes on the middle class- she would probably hope to repeal some of Bushs’s tax cut for the wealthiest in order to help balance the budget- but she cares about the middle class and those that are struggling.  Balancing the budget is a good thing folks!  She also cares deeply about public health issues and equal rights.  She is a balanced thinker and she is acts out of what she thinks is right- not what is politically expedient.  Nor does she act out of a need to pander to the worst in us. 

Mrs. Pelosi dares us to think about those who are less fortunate.  Quite frankly- that is the hallmark of the San Francisco liberal- caring for the most vulnerable in our society.  If our moral compass has moved so much towards a judgemental holier than thou status rather than a place of compassion, I am profoundly sad.  But I do believe in the innate goodness of people and that they do want to do the right thing- like Mrs. Pelosi. 

When I worked in Public Policy at the San Francisco AIDS Foundation, there was no better advocate or champion for people living with HIV/AIDS in Congress than Mrs. Pelosi. It was due to my work in HIV/AIDS and her exemplary legislative record and leadership on this issue that led to our having dinner together. 

There are three elected officials that I feel I have had a personal connection with- even if only for a moment. 

The first is California Assemblyman Mark Leno.  He was a friend before he was in public office and being in public office has not changed his goodness and his kindness and he remains a good friend to this day without any political hitches to that friendship.

The second is Congressman John Lewis.  I met Congressman Lewis when he was in San Francisco on a book tour for his book “Walking With the Wind”.  At the time I was a board member of the Human Rights Campaign and I had the honor of introducing him to an audience.  I was in awe of him and his leadership during the Civil Rights movement.  He was very kind during our brief time together.  Nearly 7 years later I met him again at an event in Atlanta Georgia.  I went up to him to introduce myself and to mention that we had once met in San Francisco.  I was astonished that he remembered me and the circumstances of our first meeting - without any hint about the previous encounter from me or anyone.  Needless to say I was impressed that someone who probably shakes tens of thousands of hands a year remembered our encounter of years ago.  I was humbled by that experience.

The third was Mrs. Pelosi.  I was a board member of an AIDS service organization in San Francisco - Shanti - at the time (which was 1995).  I was co-chairing our annual dinner and we were honoring Mrs. Pelosi for her leadership in Congress on HIV/AIDS issues. 

Mrs. Pelosi was seated at my table with my friends, my immediate colleagues and my partner.  We all had a convivial conversation and then it was time for the award.  I was to introduce the Congresswoman and then give her the award.  My partner told me that as I was talking about her - she sat in her chair smiling and quiet.  However, when I mentioned in those remarks that I was a person living with HIV/AIDS,  my partner told me her smile disappeared and she seemed genuinely upset.  I knew that she had a number of freinds who had AIDS and died.  My partner and others present said her heart seemed to have become heavy hearing that the man she was just sharing a meal with, talking with and laughing with also had AIDS.  At that time AIDS was still pretty much a death sentence (protease inhibitors had not yet hit the market) and she had a visceral reaction to hearing my news.   I have never forgotten that moment. 

So this caring and compassionate woman who felt for me upon learing about my diagnosis  is not the villain portrayed by the radical right.  Her hallmark features, of caring, fairness and compassion are exactly the qualities needed in our legislators and sadly seldom are present.  Our Congress will be a better place with her as Speaker.

I’ve heard a lot from the Republicans lately that the Democrats are too negative and that this is the best country in the world and we should celebrate that.  Bill O’Reilly recently appeared on a talk show and was discussing the danger of what he called social progressives and he posed the question of whether or not one would rather live here or in Denmark where their society has had a great deal of influence by the “social progressives”.

His question got me to thinking: Would living in Denmark be worse, better or the same as living here?  And for that matter how does the US stack up against other countries.  So I decided to do a little homework and see what I could find out about how our country stacks up against others. 

At the outset I want to be clear that I love this country and I think that our constitution is one of the greatest achievements of humankind.  I want this country to be great but I also believe that if we are not as great as we think we are and we bury our heads in the sand about where we are and where we are going we will slip down hill and become the albatross that was the fate of the Roman Empire, the British Empire and most other world powers that have existed throughout human history.  The decline of every world power in history has been due to a national hubris and I cannot think of one dominating world power in history that hasn’t fallen prey to that tragic flaw.  With vigilance and our eyes wide open we must shine a bright light on ourselves to guard against this all too common fate. 

I looked at data that I believe are objective and would not uphold any preconceived notions by either liberal or conservative.  I decided to look at issues such as literacy, freedom of the press, crime and punishment, health care and the economy.  Some folks may disagree with the issue areas on which I focused, but I am comfortable that these factors are a pretty accurate assessment of a nation’s quality of life. 

During my research I found facts that actually surprised me.  While my intuition told me that the quality of the United States is eroding, I didn’t have the facts to back up my sentiment.  Now I have some facts that actually show the situation is worse than I could have allowed myself to imagine.

First- let’s look at literacy rates.  For this information I used the “List of Literacy Rates” that was used in the United Nations Development Program Report for 2005.  The United States falls 55^th in the list.  If that is not appalling enough the countries that are more literate than the United States boggles the mind and filled me with shame as an American.  According to the report- the United States literacy rate is about 97% meaning that about 9 million Americans cannot read nor write and this places us 55^th of all the world’s nations.  Of course all of the Scandinavian countries (including O’Reilly’s example of Denmark) have literacy rates of 100%.  But here are a few of the countries ahead of the United States that may surprise you: Slovenia, Lithuania, Armenia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Albania, Bulgaria, Mongolia and Romania to name but a few.  How can this country continue to be a vital nation in the world arena when there is a higher literacy rate in Romania than in the United States?

Than I decided I would look at the issue of freedom of the press.  Due to our Constitution and its “guarantee” of freedom of the press, I assumed that we would be number one.  Imagine my shock when I found out that according to data from “Reporters Without Borders” we are not.  Their index was drawn up by asking journalists, researchers and legal experts to answer 50 questions about a whole range of  press freedom violations (such as murders or arrests of journalists, censorship, pressure, state monopolies in various fields, punishment of press law offenses and regulation of the media).  Using this index, the United States ranks 17^th of the 139 countries included (other countries were not included due to absence of reliable information).  Again- all of the Scandinavian countries were well ahead of the United States.  The list of nations with more freedoms of the press than the United States also includes Netherlands, the oft conservative ridiculed France, Germany, Belgium as well as Costa Rica and Slovenia.  To say that this is disturbing is an understatement.

So what about crime?  The United States had the 24^th highest murder rate in the world according to Seventh United Nations Survey of Crime Trends and Operations of Criminal Justice Systems, covering the period 1998 - 2000 (United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Centre for International Crime Prevention).  Mind you- there are no European countries with a higher murder rate than the US (with the exception of Russia).  Only countries like Colombia and Thailand were in the ranks of countries with higher murder rates with Bulgaria andUruguay just above the United States in 22^nd and 23^rd place.  These rates do not of course include deaths that occur in war theatres.  According to The International Crime Victim Survey which is the most far-reaching program of standardized sample surveys to look a householders’ experience with crime, policing, crime prevention and feelings of un-safety in a large number of countries, the United States has the second highest percentage of the population victimized in one year (New Zealand had the highest) among industrialized nations.  These statistics just add to my concern about our standing as a great nation.

The obvious corollary to crime is punishment, just ask Fyodor Dostoevsky.  I knew that this country is addicted to incarceration but I really didn’t know the extent of the addiction.  According to the most recent report by Human Rights Watch the United States incarcerates people at a higher rate than any other country in the world, 724 per one hundred thousand residents.  Seven million people in this country, or one out of every thirty-one people in this country is living behind bars.  According to the report, more than 600,000 people annually leave prison, most of them to distressed minority neighborhoods, facing formidable barriers to successful re-entry, including laws that limit their access to education, housing, and jobs.  Prisons are rife with sexual assaults and violence from both inmates and staff and they do not have the programs to prepare them for release which results in high recidivism.  Rather sobering statistics, aren’t they? 

But that isn’t the end of our horrific “prison record”- our record on juvenile offenders is appalling.  According to the same report from Human Rights Watch, while the United States no longer sentences child offenders to death they do face the possibility of life without parole sentences.  The report cites that there are at least 2,225 child offenders sentenced to spend the rest of their lives in prison in the United States, an estimated 59% of whom received their sentence for the first offense.  The United States is one of fourteen countries in the world known to permit such sentences and according to the Human Rights Watch report research suggests that there are no more than twelve child offenders serving life sentences without the possibility of release throughout the rest of the world.  I could not have imagined a worse record. 

Additionally the United States has increased spending on prisons at astronomical rates.  According to a report by the Justice Policy Institute, between 1995 and 2000 the United States’ expenditures on prisons at the state and local level grew at six times the rate of expenditures on education.  This pithily describes part of our problem.  The lack of spending on education leads to a lower literacy rate which leads to hopelessness, poverty, drug use, crime and thus incarceration requiring more prisons to be built!  

With 46 million people uninsured in this country and being the only industrialized national without universal health coverage I did not expect that the United States would get a good grade in the area of health care and I wasn’t wrong- the facts upheld my intuition.  According to the World Health Organization our health system rates 37^th in the world.  On the level of health of its citizens, the United States ranked 72^nd in the world according to a WHO report that used statistics from 1997.  Finally the United States ranked 24^th in a healthy life expectancy of its citizens according to WHO.  In its overall attainment of healthcare goals the USA ranks 15^th and ranks first in spending money on healthcare (this includes all sources of expenditures- not just government spending).  

My conclusion from this is that we are spending more than anyone on health care and getting little bang for our buck.  With the money spent why are we not healthier.  With the money spent- why don’t we live longer?  It could be because we are the prisoners of a system that is controlled by the insurance and pharmaceutical industries that have a bottom line and have huge profits whereas other countries have public financing of healthcare that actually allows for better health outcomes with less spending.  Even in this country, Medicare is the most cost efficient provider of health coverage in the nation with much less money spent on administration than private sector providers.   

Healthcare spending leads me to my final issue area- the economy.  Let’s start with health care’s role in our economy.  According to a January 10, 2006 article in the Washington Post (“Record Share Of Economy Spent on Health Care” by Marc Kaufman and Rob Stein) health care now consume 16 percent of the nation’s economic output — the highest proportion ever.  The overall cost of health care — everything from hospital and doctor bills to the cost of pharmaceuticals, medical equipment, insurance and nursing home and home-health care — doubled from 1993 to 2004, said the report from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. In 2004, the nation spent almost $140 billion more for health care than the year before.  In 1997, health care accounted for 13.6 percent of the gross domestic product.

“Americans rejected the tougher restrictions of managed care in the late 1990s, and yet they want all the latest advances in medical technology,” said Drew Altman, president of the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation, which researches health issues. “Since government regulation of prices and services is not in the cards, the inevitable result is higher costs.”The health care increase of 7.9 percent in 2004 was almost three times the overall national inflation rate, which was 2.7 percent. The average hourly wage for workers in private companies was essentially unchanged that year, according to the U.S. Department of Labor. According to the Post article political, medical and economic leaders and experts have long warned that health care cost trends will gradually overwhelm the economy, and many companies now complain that employee and retiree health costs are making them less competitive.

For a report by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, researchers compiled data from dozens of sources collected by the federal government and others to create 179 quality measures, including 46 “core” measures.  The researchers concluded that the overall quality of care in 2005 had improved at a rate of 2.8 percent from 2003. That was the same increase as the year before, and many measures showed no improvement or even decreases.  For example, there was improvement in the percentage of patients with high blood pressure whose condition was under control, but no improvement in providing speedy treatment to people having heart attacks. So while healthcare costs are overwhelming our nation and spending is a disturbing percentage of our economy our nation plunges deeper and deeper into debt.  Under President Clinton the nation experienced balanced budgets and actual decreases in the national debt.  During the Bush administration, due primarily to the costs of waging the War in Iraq and to a lesser extent due to the out of control pork from the 109^th Congress the debt has increased exponentially to $8.2 trillion dollars.  Of this total amount outstanding at the end of the calendar year 2005, approximately $4.7 trillion was owed to the public (both foreign and domestic) in the form of treasury bonds and T-bills.  Of that $4.7 trillion, nearly half, $2.2 trillion was owed to foreign interests. A disturbing trend.  We are a nation that is heavily indebted to foreign interests.  Is this healthy?  I would posit that it is dangerous and wildly reckless.Our economy is also in an odd place- unlike any time in recent memory.  Economic indicators show a robust economy but it isn’t translating into better wages and quality of life for workers.  David Lazarus of the “San Francisco Chronicle” wrote an excellent analysis of this anomaly in an October 25^th column.  Below is an excerpt from Mr. Lazarus’ article:

Since September 2004, average hourly wages have increased 6.8 percent and consumer prices have climbed 7 percent, according to the Labor Department. This means real wages over the period have declined 0.2 percent. In other words, and contrary to the president’s sunny appraisal of
U.S. workers’ fortunes, many people’s paychecks in reality are continuing to fall behind the cost of living.

“Since 2003, there’s been an ongoing decline in real wages,” said Arindrajit Dube, an economist at UC Berkeley’s Institute of Industrial Relations. “There may have been increases in wages in nominal terms, but paychecks aren’t keeping up with inflation.” What makes this situation even more remarkable is that productivity keeps growing — up 2.7 percent in the first half of the year. Traditionally, increases in worker productivity are reflected in increases in workers’ compensation. No longer. And economists have been scratching their heads to come up with plausible explanations.

Two related factors appear to be the continuing trend of companies outsourcing work abroad and the waning power of labor unions. With workers increasingly skittish about their job security, the thinking goes, there have been fewer demands on employers for higher wages. This means less money is flowing to workers and more cash is remaining on companies’ ledgers. This, in turn, helps to explain the stellar performance of major businesses and the stratospheric performance of the Dow Jones industrial average, which closed Tuesday at a record 12,127.88. “The economy’s doing quite well,” said Martin Carnoy, a Stanford University labor economist. “The question is who’s getting the gains. Corporations are definitely seeing higher profits, but middle-class workers aren’t much better off than before.”  

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a Washington think tank, wages and salaries have grown by an average annual rate of 2 percent, adjusted for inflation, since 2001. Over that same period, average corporate profits have soared each year by 13.7 percent. “The overall pie is expanding as fast as ever, but most of that is being accrued in the form of increased profits,” said UC Berkeley’s Dube. “Over the next 15 years, if things don’t change, we’re going to have a vastly more unequal society.”

So I return to partisanship and Mr. O’Reilly’s original question about living in Denmark.  From all the research I can find, the Danes have a better quality and standard of life than we do here.  That doesn’t mean I am off to Denmark- I still have hope for this country.  After all we do have a remarkable Constitution- as long as it exists and is upheld – but with recent acts by the Bush administration that erode constitutional protections I am worried but I hope our rule of law wins out over the hubris of an out of control executive.  In fairness I think that the President thinks he is doing the right thing with some of his actions- but we aren’t a nation that is controlled by the President we are controlled by the rule of law- even the President cannot escape it.

By looking at the issue areas in this analysis and considering the recent trends in our economy, we need to be honest with ourselves.  In order to reclaim our greatness we must continually ask ourselves hard questions, if we don’t we will end up like so many other world powers that exist no more- guilty of hubris and relegated to a once great nation in the pages in human history.