Is Our Health Care as Good as We Think?

Among some of the screaming I have heard on TV during news reports of Town Hall Meetings and interviews with mad as hell constituents on the subject of health care in this country are: "If we have such bad health care in this country, why do people from all over the world come here to be taken care of?" and: "who wants to have the proven bad care and waiting times of Canada, England, etc?"

Taking the time to research the truth around these screamings I have found some interesting and disappointing information about our country and how it compares to other countries. Attached Is a listing I have compiled on two statistics that show: We have only the 19th highest life expectancy in the world behind countries such as Japan, Italy, Canada, England, etc, and: we place 20th in the world in mortality rates for infants per 1,000 live births. Maybe we aren't as good as we think and could use some improvement even with all of our great hospitals, research and testing equipment.

LIFE EXPECTANCY 2007
PLACE COUNTRY AGE
1 JAPAN 81.4
AUSTRALIA 80.6
2 SWEDEN 80.6
SWITZERLAND 80.6
5 CANADA 80.3
6 FRANCE 79.9
ITALY 79.9
8 SPAIN 79.8
9 NORWAY 79.7
10 ISRAEL 79.6
11 GREECE 79.4
12 AUSTRIA 79.2
13 GERMANY 79
NEW ZEALAND 79
15 FINLAND 78.7
UNITED KINGDOM 78.7
17 CYPRUS 78
DENMARK 78
UNITED STATES 78

INFANT MORTALITY 2007
PLACE COUNTRY PER 1,000
1 SWEDEN 2.8
2 JAPAN 3.2
3 FINLAND 3.5
4 NORWAY 3.6
5 CZECH REPUBLIC 3.9
6 GERMANY 4.1
7 FRANCE 4.2
8 SPAIN 4.3
SWITZERLAND 4.3
10 AUSTRIA 4.5
DENMARK 4.5
12 AUSTRALIA 4.6
CANADA 4.6
13 PORTUGAL 4.9
14 UNITED KINGDOM 5
15 IRELAND 5.2
16 GREECE 5.3
17 ITALY 5.7
NEW ZEALAND 5.7
19 SOUTH KOREA 6.1
20 UNITED STATES 6.4

Socialism Not New to U.S.

Dear editor:

In 1934 Congress passed the law creating the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as an answer to the disastrous loss of deposits in banks across the country due to the Great Depression starting in 1929. Many opposed it and fought it because it smacked of “Socialism,” which they believed threatened our country. It has since saved depositors, mainly small depositors, billions of dollars of hard earned savings and retirements.

Then in the following year (1935) Congress passed the Social Security Act which offered a helping hand to those who needed financial help for their later years when they no longer could earn a living. Once again opponents fought this entitlement saying it smacked of “Socialism.” Why even its name (Social Security) suggested that.

That same year followed with Unemployment Insurance which would help the millions of Americans who had lost their jobs during the depression and for those who would need a safety net in the future when hard times appeared due to loss of a job. The “boo birds” appeared, fought it again on the basis of “Socialism,” claiming the government had no right to help needy citizens of our country. The “haves” could care less about the “have-nots.”

1936 saw the completion of Boulder Dam (now named Hoover Dam) which brought employment to thousands needed for the construction of this huge project, and created Lake Mead, flood control to the Colorado River, and a tremendous capacity for electrical power needed for the many states in the area. This, it was claimed by many, was the federal government competing with private enterprise and a furthering of “Socialism.”

The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) came into being in 1939 and brought power and electricity to a section of our country that had never known any. In addition the price was low enough that it attracted farming and industry as the area had never seen. In addition over 38,000 barges today ply the waterways created by the system of dams which control the many rivers the TVA services. “Socialism” was the cry when this act was passed by Congress and signed by President Roosevelt.

Medicare was created in 1965 and brought healthcare to an aging population that could not afford treatment and care in their later years. The insurance companies and their compatriots in Congress fought this on the basis of free enterprise being threatened and creeping “Socialism” taking over our country.

And now it is happening all over again. It isn’t a question of is the president’s health plan good or bad, but rather is it “Socialism.” The panderers of hate, half-truths, bigotry and false statements are flooding the air waves with dangerous accusations causing an uncontrollable situation in America as shown in the town hall meetings across our country. The Rush Limbaughs, the Shawn Hannities, the Glenn Becks, the Sarah Palins and the Newt Gingriches are leading this dangerous charge with wrongful accusations of “Socialism,” “Communism,” and even “Naziism.” Truth is not their aim, but rather power and greed.

Health care “Socialism?” Who would like to give up the “Socialistic” acts listed above? With hundreds of banks failing this year and deposits secured by FDIC who wants to see this “Socialism” scrapped? Who would want to throw millions of Americans out onto the streets if they lost “Socialistic” Social Security? With almost ten million citizens out of work should we do away with Unemployment Insurance that smacks of “Socialism?”

Should we tear down Hoover Dam and close the TVA system? How about doing away with Medicare because it competes “Socialistically” with insurance companies? The answer is, of course not.

The problem is finding a solution to the need of millions of Americans who have no health coverage, not the need to create fear with accusations that aren’t true and causing millions grief. Stop the hatred and find a solution. Franklin Delano Roosevelt was right when he so long ago said, “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” It is time for all of our Congressmen and Senators to stop worrying about reelection and pandering to their base and the merchants of doom on talk radio from spreading distortions and lies. It’s time to worry about America no matter what the system of governance it follows. And it’s time for the average American to learn, by reading what is really in the proposed legislation, not by the rumors and lies it hears and reads about on the internet.

Defending Against Ignorance

Once again the local paper has allowed another reader to attack me personally because of my letter that knocked the "Birthers" who questioned the native citizenship of our president. I wrote this defense which I hope they publish.

Dear editor:

It is interesting to read a letter from Ray Kingsley in the American Press (August 17, 2009,) dealing with a writing of mine, wherein he states “this is not a personal attack on Sam Schoolsky,” continues about my constitutional right to have an opinion different than his, and then proceeds to do that very thing he claims not to be doing. Sadly he doesn’t know the difference.

Mr. Kingsley writes about my bringing up items that have been “rehashed ad nauseum” and what his grammar school teacher called “stirring the pot.” If the gentleman wasn’t so busy attacking me personally he would realize that bringing up all of these items (right wing religious radicals, denying evolution, the Holocaust, etc) when discussing the bigotry and ignorance of the “Birthers” who try to ridiculously disprove the native citizenship of our president, he would come to realize that what he is reading is actually proving a point by showing “pattern.” It is used all the time by attorneys, and in this case very appropriately.

And in so far as my writing or not writing on subjects he claims I have ignored, let me tell him that there are enough people who write and want to see failure in this president and his administration no matter how much it might hurt our country. I’ll choose my own subjects thank you. Perhaps he should write about his views on subjects he disagrees with me on instead of just attacking me. I would welcome that and maybe so should the American Press.

By the way, only my friends call me Sam.

The Shame of the Senate's Republicans

Seventy-five percent of Republican members of the United States Senate have dropped “the other shoe.” (The “first shoe” is the Birthers fight over the qualification of Barak Obama to be president.) Obviously the Grand Old Party and its supporters refuses to recognize the fact that in the very near future “white America” will be in the minority and people of color will be the major political force in the country. If they continue down this un-American and un-patriotic path they are writing their own obituary as a national party and greatly harm our country’s two party system.

The negative action that thirty-one Republican senators took during the confirmation vote of President Obama’s nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor shows their very ignorance of this population shift. They have shown that ideology is more important than qualification, and anyone “different” than us (race or ethnicity) is not acceptable to be a member of the Supreme Court. Florida Republican Mel Martinez, who announced his support of Judge Sotomayor, said it best, “We have allowed ideology to hold a preeminent role as opposed to qualifications. I find it very, very appalling.” He stood up and spoke for confirmation as opposed to his fellow Republicans and radio and talk show bigots who shouted unceasingly for defeat of the nomination. Even the well respected presidential hopeful “hero” member of the Senate, John McCain brought shame upon himself, stating “There is no doubt that Judge Sotomayor has the professional background and qualifications one hopes for in a Supreme Court nominee.” He nonetheless voted against Sotomayor because she was an “activist judge who strayed beyond the rule of law.” I don’t remember this war hero of a senator objecting to the activism shown by the high court when it halted the vote count in Florida that made George W. Bush president. Guess he means that the dirty word “activism” only comes into play when the decision is not in your favor.
Have we reached the point in our judicial history that does not allow anyone from being affected by their upbringing and experience in life? Must they not be from a minority of any kind because they might understand what it is like to be a member of any minority that has a history of being downtrodden? Should we now exclude African-Americans, Hispanics, Native Americans, Catholics, Jews, etc? What would make anyone acceptable to the 31 GOP Senators who voted against Judge Sotomayor? Maybe we should invent a machine that would make every decision for the Supreme Court and would eliminate any knowledge, feelings and humanity and do away with “activism.” Is that what they want to turn our country into? After all, no human being could pass the litmus test that is now being applied by the members of the United States Senate, who couldn’t pass the tests they obviously want to apply to court nominees.

Native Born Obama?????

Well, the right-wing religious radicals are at it again. Not only do they deny those “crazy whacko ideas” like evolution (they claim it’s a theory and not a proven fact,) climate change and the responsibility of mankind for the problem, deny the Holocaust, and claim the President of the United States is a racist (a favorite claim of right wing radio and television,) but now they are pushing the idea (thru a loud vocal group, broadcasters and Republican Congressmen) that the President isn’t a natural born citizen of the United States which is a requirement for the office. They demand that he show his Hawaiian birth certificate, which they have already decided is a phony. They also say that even if he was born in Hawaii his father wasn’t, therefore he cannot be a natural born citizen. Someone really needs to learn American citizenship law because anyone born in the United States is automatically a citizen no matter the citizenship of their parents. But that’s beside the fact. He definitely is a natural born citizen as testified to by the Republican candidate for president during the campaign, Sen. John McCain. Can we trust the word of a respected member of Congress and a war hero?

But even if we give the devil his due, it brings up a ghastly problem. What are we going to do about the laws signed by the first seven presidents of the United States? None of them were natural born citizens of our beloved country but rather citizens of Great Britain. There was no United States as we know it before the War of Independence (1776) or even the writing of the Constitution in 1789. Maybe we should throw out all their signings, decisions, and military leadership as the works of foreign born nationals. Take a look at the birth dates: Washington 1732; Adams 1735; Jefferson 1743 (my goodness, this foreigner wrote the Declaration of Independence); Madison 1751 (he was Commander in Chief during the War of 1812); Monroe 1758 (whoops there goes the Monroe Doctrine); Adams 1767; and Jackson 1767 (Jacksonian Democracy goes down the drain.)

Ridiculous? Of course. But no more ridiculous than those who would malign a duly elected native American President. Or is it just another form of bigotry couched in politics.