Last night we attended a screening of the film “What’s The Matter with Kansas,” at Liberty Hall in Lawrence.  The film is the work of two filmmakers from Chicago.  I have some thoughts about the film and, due to the length of my essay on the matter, have added it to this blog as a separte page.”  If you are interested in the film and some thoughts about it click on the “Kansas” tab.

It is hard to describe the impact that patients and volunteers at the Kansas City free clinic had on my emotions and thinking.  I can say that the humility and appreciation of patients along with the caring and sincerity of so many volunteers from across the United States has deepened my belief in the basic decency of people in general.  However, that doesn’t fully capture the emotions and thoughts with which I came away from the experience.

For two days, people needing health care streamed into Bartle Hall in Kansas City, Missouri.  They came by the hundreds each hour – old people, young people, obviously very poor people, people that could have been my neighbors.  I had the opportunity to help them to triage, to labs, to dental care, to physicians, to eye care, and to a variety of other services.  I was able to spend a considerable amount of time with these patients and to connect with them as fellow human beings.  I can say that it was my good fortune to have the opportunity to be involved in this amazingly well-run operation by the National Association of Free Clinics and the Kansas City, Missouri Free Clinic.

Meeting and working with these patients and volunteers from Johnson County, Kansas City, Missouri, other local communities, California, Iowa, Washington, DC, and from practically every state in the Nation, was an experience that I will cherish.  It was hard to maintain my professionalism at times during the two days.  On many occasions, looking across the massive hall and seeing people sitting patiently in waiting areas and seeing health care professionals giving their best professional services in other areas, it was hard not to “choke up.”

I must mention that Keith Olberman is a mensch.  By promoting free clinics on his program, he has raised over two million dollars and has made several clinics like the one in Kansas City possible.  Also, if you watch his show, you will often see Nicole Lamoureaux, Executive Director of the National Association of Free Clinics.  Nicole is an absolute angel.  With her leadership and Keith Olberman’s support, thousands of uninsured Americans have had health care they would have not have had.  They have undoubtedly saved many lives.

In the latest issue of Reason Magazine, John Mackey, co-founder and CEO of Whole Foods, following up on an op ed piece in the August 16^th edition of the Wall Street Journal (in which he made the inane statement that the U.S. Constitution doesn’t say anything about health insurance), has further denigrated the U.S. government and any health insurance that could emanate from it .  In fact, his photo graces the cover of the issue.

In case readers aren’t aware of the provenance of Reason Magazine, I will point out that it is the house organ of the Koch billionaire, anti-people, ultra right wing, tea bagging political machine (the Kochtopus).  The Kochtopus has housed Reason Magazine in the Reason Foundation.

The Reason piece is actually an interview with Nick Gillespie, editor, Koch apparatchik, and doyen of a warped form of libertarianism pushed by right wing billionaires like the Kochs, Mellon-Scaife, and a racist outfit called the Bradley Foundation (which put up the money for the racist-tome The Bell Curve).  In the interview, Mackey explains how he came to his political views by reading the likes of Ayn Rand and Milton Friedman.  He cobbled the views of these typical right wing theorists together into the same form of claptrap nonsense that is generally used by right wingers to support their mean spirited views on the role of government.

In addition to the interview, the article listed the seven principles of Mackey’s health care plan.  They could be boiled down to this:  cut taxes and, metaphorically speaking, let people sink or swim.  Isn’t that what the U.S. Government has been doing?

According to the interview, the WSJ piece caused some immediate and furious blow back from left of center shoppers, which has since “died down.”  I intend to do all I can to kick it up again. Mackey states that 80% of Whole Foods shoppers have a college degree.  You can bet that a large portion of that 80% is liberal and wouldn’t particularly appreciate his attacks on plans for some needed social justice.  The same could probably be said about the 20% that aren’t college educated.

DON’T SPEND YOUR MONEY IN WHOLE FOODS.  BOYCOTT WHOLE FOODS!

No one knows for certain what  is happening but reports indicate that the public option is dead.  The ten Senators negotiating a deal (five liberals and five conservatives) have sent a bill to the CBO for a cost analysis.  If initial reports are correct, the negotiations have produced a trade off for the public option.  Essentially, individuals will be able to buy into Medicare at age 55.  It has also been reported by various sources (Senator Bernie Sanders, Reuters, and Governor Ed Rendel), that Medicaid eligibility will be raised to 150% of poverty  ($33,000 for a family of 4 in Kansas).

We will probably need to fight the right wing forces in Kansas that would like to keep us from participating in this plan.  Basically, progress has been made but the struggle must continue for full social justice through health care for all.

I have heard a rumor that former KCK mayor Carol Maranovich is considering a run for the House of Representatives in the 3^rd Congressional District.  I don’t know how true this is, but it should scare the bejesus out of the Johnson County Republicans.  I say, let’s cheer her on!

As it is now, you can inherit about 3.6 million dollars (six million for a couple) without paying an inheritance tax of 45%.  The tax was due to undergo a one-year repeal beginning next month.  The U.S. House voted to extend the tax permanently.  Congressman Dennis Moore voted for the extension of the tax.  Thanks to Congressman Moore!

Economist David Burress wrote an excellent letter to the JW, which was published today.  If you missed it, here it is:

Ken Meier says shrinking state and local government is good medicine during a recession (12/5/09 letter). A substantial majority of economists disagree. That’s because spending government money to put people to work actually puts people to work—and then those workers spend money and put additional people to work. That’s exactly  what Obama’s stimulus package was supposed to do—and an emerging consensus among economists says it succeeded. Even among members of the rather conservative Association of Business Economists, an August poll found  73% expecting the stimulus to increase 2010 GDP by at least 1/2%, with almost half expecting at least 1%.

 Admittedly, things are a bit different at state and local levels because of balanced budget requirements. Usually those requirements make sense, but during a recession they’re perverse.  Falling revenues are forcing most government units to cut back, leading to reductions in demand that offset  the stimulus package. If those governments had been able to borrow money to keep their operations level, unemployment would be falling right now, instead of holding flat.

Even without borrowing money, it turns out  that local economies can benefit if local governments increase taxes to keep their workers employed. According to an accepted principle known as the “balanced budget multiplier,” government expenditures can add more demand to the economy than taxes remove. My back-of-the envelope estimate suggests a $1M property tax increase spent on local government employees would create around 10 Lawrence jobs on net. I urge the city to fund a full study.

David Burress

Lead economist, Ad Astra Institute

I have to ask myself, “Why, in this rich country, are we even talking about cutting the Medicare program for assisted daily living, which keeps the elderly and disabled in their homes?”  And “Why is the Senate talking about ending a health care safety net for poor children?”  However, having closely watched the United States political-social-economic system evolve from the vibrant capitalism and Great Society programs of the 1960s to its current form of decadent plutocracy, I am not surprised that the U.S. Congress is about to cut benefits for the elderly and end the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIPS). 

Benefits for keeping the elderly and disabled in their homes through home health care currently comprise 3.7% of the Medicare budget.  Under the current Senate health care reform proposal, this program is slated to absorb 10% of cuts in Medicare.  Medical device manufacturers, drug companies, and insurance companies, will continue to scam the health care system at a rate that renders any home health care benefits trivial in the overall scheme of things.

The Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIPs) would be repealed under current proposals (as passed by the House and as debated in the Senate).  Poor families would be forced to buy health insurance in the health insurance exchange likely to emerge from a final health care bill.  Good luck with that!  According to Marian Wright Edelman of The Children’s Defense Fund, “Children by the millions are going to be worse rather than better off.”

Ghandi was once asked what he thought of Western Civilization.  He thought about it for a moment and then replied, “It would be a nice idea.”  What can we say about a society that pours unlimited amounts of money into war and won’t provide adequate support for a decent program to keep elderly and disabled citizens in their homes in lieu of institutionalization?  Senator Claire McCaskill could have done something decent and civilized on Friday.  She could have voted for the Community Living Assistance Services & Support Act (CLASS).  It was a pet project of Senator Kennedy.  It did pass, but it passed with Senator McCaskill and eleven other Democrats voting against it.

Instead of joining the Democratic majority and voting for it, she voted with that cabal of mean-spirited, hypocritical group of Senate Democrats such as Kent Conrad of South Dakota.  She voted against a bill providing for a voluntary, modest premium by workers to be paid into a fund to provide services should they become disabled and unable to meet their daily living needs but with some assistance can stay in their homes.  Senator McCaskill thinks this would be a “drain” on the federal budget.  In fact, the impact of this humane program on the U.S. budget would be, at worst, de minimus.

I like Claire McCaskill.  That is why I find her vote on the CLASS Act inexplicable.  I expect this narrow-mindedness from Ben Nelson, Blanche Lincoln, Kent Conrad, and a few other Democrats in the Senate.  But I think Senator McCaskill is better than that.  That is why I am willing to drive over to Missouri and walk door to door for her.  I understand that Missouri is a tough place for Democrats, but she wouldn’t have been hurt by voting for this bill.

I wonder if the readers of this blog are as fed up with the health care deficit hawk grandstanding of some of these Democrats as I am.  Claire McCaskill’s phone numbers are:

Washington, DC:  202 228 6326                                   Kansas City, MO:  816 228 6326

We need to let ultra-conservative Kansas legislators such as Brenda Landwehr, chair of the House Health & Human Services Committee (if you can believe that), know that government health care dollars are good for our economy and good for the sinking middle class.  Ms Landwehr has been on the Koch billionaire (“Kochtopus”) bus traveling across Kansas with other members of the evangelical, right-wing (of the anti-choice-anti-life variety) legislative delegation in an attempt to keep federal health care dollars out of Kansas (see my e-mail of 11/21, entitled “Mean-Ass Kansas Republican Health Care Proposal”).

Please direct Ms Landwehr’s and her Republican cohorts’ attention to a report issued by the Kansas Hospital Association entitled “The Importance of the Health Care Sector to the Kansas Economy.”  The report can be accessed at http://www.kha-net.org/Communications/MediaReleases/32164.aspx.

Perhaps readers of this blog would think that a report that discusses social accounting matrix analysis (SAM) is a real eye glazer and only for policy wonks of the highest order.  But it isn’t – really, honestly.  Take my word for it.  It is quite fascinating.  The first paragraph should make it clear that the Republican campaign to keep health care dollars out of Kansas is a “job killer.”  It states the following:

“Though the connection between health care services and local economic development are often overlooked, there are at least three important relationships to be recognized.  A strong health care system can attract and maintain business and industry growth, attract and retain retirees, and also create jobs in the local area.” (page 1)

The report can be boiled down to this:  the health care industry is approaching 20% of GDP across this nation and in Kansas.  It accounts for a very large payroll in Kansas and every other state.  How large?  The health care industry in Kansas provides 177,585 direct Kansas health care jobs and, due to a multiplier effect, accounts for a total of 290,728 jobs.  Employees of hospitals, nursing homes, clinics, and other health related institutions purchase goods and services from other businesses.  This is the multiplier effect.

In a state with a work force of slightly less than 1.8 million, a 290,728 (16.4%) job producing segment of the economy is a big deal.  When these Republicans start messing with it, they should be called to account. 

It is my intention to gin up a campaign to not only save but to increase jobs in Kansas by supporting health care legislation that would increase federal tax dollars directed toward coverage of the uninsured and underinsured citizens of this state.  We can most certainly count on Marci Francisco – who receives my post notices – but we need to support her and insure that all Democrat and reasonable Republican representatives (i.e. Tom Sloan) are aware of our concern about this.