Darren,
I think you're being just a bit too sensitive here. Robert has a valid
point about the political involvement of some churches, both in terms of
discussing matters of public policy (I believe permitted under IRS
rules), and in terms of endorsing candidates (the subject of an
organized effort by the Alliance Defense Fund to overturn IRS rules
forbidding such endorsements-see
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/07/AR200809
0702460.html). As a teacher, it's always interesting to deal with a
student or a room full of students who hold very tightly to a set of
beliefs because those are the beliefs that they were raised with.
Personally, I am very respectful of the personal beliefs of my students.
That does not, however, mean that I reward ignorance. I see the job of
any college teacher as including the task of getting students to examine
their beliefs-hold them up for factual analysis, considering as many
angles as possible. It's part of the "examined life" that's at the core
of all education. This doesn't mean a student has to discard deeply
held religious beliefs; on the contrary, faith that rests on reason with
examined principles probably will serve a person much better than mere
blind faith. It also doesn't require students to abandon political
beliefs, but it does require students to think through the meaning and
application of those beliefs. As a college teacher, I have to commit to
the lifelong examining of life that Socrates spoke of, keeping my mind
open to new ideas and holding those ideas up to the light of fact and
reason. I try to look my own ignorance in the eye on a regular basis.
What the debate over health care reform comes down to, ultimately, is
what kind of society we wish to live in. Is it one where each of us
exists on an island with no obligation to anyone else, where the firemen
let the house burn down because Olbian County TN decided that fire
protection should be fee-based, rather than tax based? Are we OK with
ranking 33rd in death rates for children under 5, and 38th in life
expectancy from birth? Or is our society one where each of us
contributes for the good of all of us, where we're willing to commit to
a range of steps to change those numbers for the better. When the
ambulance arrives at the scene of a gory accident, do the paramedics
walk away because the victim has no health insurance? Personally, I
think there's some sweet spot between my scenarios of individual
responsibility on the one side, and the total nanny state on the other.
But where that is should be our point of argument, and the argument
should be based on examined facts and beliefs, rather than tweets from
politicians and sound bites from political and religious demagogues
(Yes, Glenn Beck, I'm looking at you).
Pam has her work cut out for her, but so do the rest of us. She claims
to be learning from us, but I think it may be the other way around.
Carolyn
Carolyn Hotchkiss
Professor of Law
Babson College
781-239-5528
[log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Daren Bakst
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2010 10:21 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Congressional Budget Office on Health Care Costs thank you
and comment on different student populations
This whole conversation has certainly devolved into unnecessary
attacks. If I read the email below correctly, the suggestion is that
many individuals in the sticks (not the enlightened coasts) are too
ignorant to make informed decisions because they are fooled by a
coalition of religious and grassroots leaders. If only they were able
to be free of these pressures, they would support the "unequivocal"
policy positions that would benefit them.
Apparently, those on the coast and the non-church going crowd are the
ones that know what is best for everyone.
In my opinion, this list benefits from thoughtful discussions on policy
issues, such as health care reform, regardless of ideology. Staying on
point without disparaging others and their views often seems elusive as
evidenced by this current thread. I hope that we can get back on track.
Daren Bakst
Director of Legal and Regulatory Studies
John Locke Foundation
http://www.johnlocke.org
Adjunct Professor
Barton College
http://www.barton.edu
Thomas,Robert E wrote:
> Wonderfully stated Pam.
>
> It is often difficult from those of us from different regions of the
> country to understand the mindset of distinct segments of the
population
> in the Heartland (and the South) that rely fully and wholeheartedly on
> what they learn, are taught or told in church. When these churches
> partner with political activists, it becomes even more difficult for
> members of these populations to listen or accept policy proscriptions
that
> are often unequivocally in their best interests.
>
> Pam, thanks for providing the insight.
>
> Robert
>
> On 10/25/10 8:10 AM, "Gershuny, Pam" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>
>> Thanks Bill for posting.
>>
>> I am just back home from Bloomington, IN's fantastic Tri-State
>> Conference. Many thanks to Eve Brown, the new president, for doing
an
>> excellent job and congratulations to Nancy White who won the Master
>> Teacher Competition and to Adam Epstein and Bridget Niland who won
the
>> Outstanding Paper Competition.
>>
>> Many of my students have framed pictures of George Bush hanging on
the
>> wall of their dining rooms. They bring bibles with them into the
>> classroom, tell me they don't trust science in the least, and believe
in
>> creationism. Many are very, very poor and the first generation in
their
>> family to go to college. Coming from a very poor family myself, (my
>> family thought I was crazy to go to school so much), and knowing
>> first-hand the feeling of not having food in the house, I understand
and
>> care about their success. Luckily, I had a fantastic, unbelievable,
>> great public school system. My students are not so fortunate. They
do
>> have church families which can provide food and support in economic
>> downturns. I can see that asking a student here to accept my views
on
>> gay marriage or evolution is the equivalent of asking a young person
>> without financial means of their own to turn their back on a
community
>> that provides food and shelter.
>>
>> As a writer and teacher I do not support a system that tosses my
>> children and I into intractable poverty if one of us becomes ill.
>> Individuals who are financially successful can comfortably argue for
the
>> status quo and less government involvement. They are not in
jeopardy.
>> Why not argue for less regulation or government involvement in health
>> care? Social safety nets are not necessary in your case, they are an
>> expense you must bear. If we were a more prosperous nation, with
greater
>> taxes on the wealthiest 10% of our citizens, perhaps we would not
argue
>> about health care, a.k.a., relief from pain when we are suffering.
>> Austan Goolsbee, youtube link,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ma5np8PcaY8
>>
>> I am certainly on this listserve to hear from everyone. I am
isolated
>> geographically and politically in a very small community. My job
>> description included gender law. The broader the topical discusions
the
>> better, from my perspective. I am the first business law professor
at my
>> school with a research requirement. I am not surrounded by
colleagues or
>> co-authors with research experience. Nor did I learn anything about
>> academic careers in my family. I am here to learn from all of you.
I
>> always come to applaud your successes on Saturday night at the annual
>> conference and hope you continue to share those on this listserve
because
>> I am learning from you.
>>
>> Best to you all,
>> Pam
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk on behalf of
Bill
>> Shaw
>> Sent: Mon 10/25/2010 4:52 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Congressional Budget Office on Health Care Costs
>>
>>
>> You might be interested in Googling "
>>
>>
>> Boehner: GOP Health Care Alternative "Aims at Driving Down Costs,"
for a
>> look at the Republican alternative. Both of these positions were
>> published at the time of the congressional debate. * It would be
>> interesting to know if both positions covered the same number of
people.
>>
>>
========================================================================
==
>> ===
>>
>>
>>
>> CBO Score On Health Care Bill Released
>>
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/18/cbo-score-on-health-care_n_502
54
>> 3.html>
>>
>> Comprehensive health care reform will cost the federal government
$940
>> billion over a ten-year period, but will increase revenue and cut
other
>> costs by a greater amount, leading to a reduction of $138 billion in
the
>> federal deficit over the same period, according to an analysis by the
>> Congressional Budget Office, a Democratic source tells HuffPost. It
will
>> cut the deficit by $1.2 trillion over the second ten year period.
>>
>> The source said it also extends Medicare's solvency by at least nine
>> years and reduces the rate of its growth by 1.4 percent, while
closing
>> the doughnut hole for seniors, meaning there will no longer be a gap
in
>> coverage of medication. The CBO also estimated it would extend
coverage
>> to 32 million additional people.
>>
>> The CBO score is the last piece House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)
was
>> waiting on before putting the puzzle together on the House floor. A
>> contingent of Blue Dogs has been holding out support, insisting that
the
>> bill be fully paid for and not increase the deficit. The numbers give
a
>> major boost to Pelosi and her leadership team, which can now begin
the
>> whip count in earnest and can specifically point to the cost savings.
>>
>> With the CBO score released, the Democratic whip team has a specific,
>> thoroughly-analyzed bill to show to undeclared members who can no
longer
>> claim they are "waiting to see the language." Pelosi has very little
room
>> for error and needs to move nearly every undecided voter to a solid
"yes."
>>
>> Since the House last passed legislation in November, three Democrats
who
>> opposed it -- John Tanner and Bart Gordon of Tennessee and Brian
Baird of
>> Washington -- have announced their retirements, relieving them of
some
>> political pressure to oppose the bill. Pelosi may end up drawing on
those
>> exiting members for a cushion of support.
>>
>> The reconciliation package that the CBO analyzed makes slight changes
to
>> the underlying bill. Subsidies for the uninsured to purchase
insurance
>> are increased and more funding is dedicated to community health
centers.
>> The excise tax on insurance premiums is scaled back so that it hits
few
>> families. The bill also demands a higher commitment from drugmakers,
>> aiming to close the so-called "doughnut hole" -- the time that
seniors
>> must pay full price for medication. The pharmaceutical lobby has
signed
>> off on the increased commitment and will be running ads in Democratic
>> districts in support of reform.
>>
>> The reconciliation package, because of budget rules that limit its
policy
>> scope, does not deal with two contentious social issues: abortion or
>> immigration. Anti-choice Democrats are threatening to kill the entire
>> project over the abortion language in the Senate bill and
Congressional
>> Hispanic Caucus members are rebelling because of its draconian
>> immigration provisions. The Senate language bars federal funds from
>> paying for abortion, but doesn't go far enough, according to some
>> Democrats. Undocumented workers would be barred from purchasing
insurance
>> -- even with their own money -- from private companies which operate
>> within exchanges set up by reform.
>>
>>
>> The reconciliation package is headed for a Rules Committee vote on
>> Thursday with a vote in the full House to follow. But before the
House
>> votes, it will require the commitment of 50-plus members of the
Senate to
>> agree to pass the identical bill. A Democratic Senator told HuffPost
>> Tuesday night that Senate leadership had yet to begin whipping
support
>> for the bill because the language hadn't been finalized. Now it's
been
>> finalized.
>>
>> The reform effort was jolted forward Wednesday morning, when Rep.
Dennis
>> Kucinich (D-Ohio), who was a firm no as of last week, announced that
he
>> would back the bill.
>>
>> "This is a defining moment for whether or not we'll have any
opportunity
>> to move off square one on the issue of health care. And so even
though I
>> don't like the bill, I've made a decision to support it in the hopes
that
>> we can move towards a more comprehensive approach once this
legislation
>> is done," he said. "If I can vote for this bill, there's not many
people
>> who shouldn't be able to support it."
>>
>> Anti-choice Democrats have begun to back away from their certain
>> opposition over the last several days. Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.)
has
>> pledged to back the bill and Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), who opposes
>> abortion rights, said on Tuesday evening that she is still
considering
>> voting for it. "That is one of the factors," she said of the Senate's
>> abortion restrictions. "It is not the only factor."
>>
>> It's not clear, though, what Kaptur's concern is. At one point
Tuesday,
>> she said that she didn't like the Senate language
>>
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/21/AR20091
22
>> 103224.html> because it went too far beyond existing restrictions on
>> federal funding of abortion. "The abortion issue is an issue for me
in
>> that I don't want to go beyond existing law," she said. "I view what
was
>> done in the Senate as going beyond existing law."
>>
>> But at other times, she said that the Senate bill did not adequately
>> ensure that federal money would not be spent on abortion and also
cited
>> federally-funded community health centers as a potential way
>>
<http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/03/senate-health-care-bill-abortio
n-
>> typo> such money could pay for abortions. HuffPost pointed out to her
>> that such centers do not perform abortions. "Read the language," she
>> insisted.
>>
>> HuffPost asked Kaptur what the difference is between a federal
subsidy of
>> a private COBRA health care plan that covers abortion and a federal
>> subsidy of a private plan under the proposed health care reform. In
both
>> cases, a consumer uses a mix of personal and federal money to
purchase a
>> private plan.
>>
>> "Those are private choices [made by COBRA consumers] and the private
>> plans that are out there, for instance federal health plans that we
have:
>> We've handled that separately. They can purchase it separately. They
can
>> purchase it separately. Keep the line as firm in the sand as you can
and
>> that makes me more comfortable," she said.
>>
>> HuffPost noted that Kaptur had essentially just described the
provisions
>> of the Senate bill, which requires consumers to write separate,
personal
>> checks for abortion coverage. "I don't think what I've read in the
Senate
>> language is that," she said.
>>
>> Kaptur, a social liberal, has a number of other concerns she said,
>> including the absence of a public option. "When you take out the
public
>> option, when you take out the ability to negotiate prescription
drugs,
>> when you take out McCarran-Ferguson,
>>
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/29/reid-punts-on-insurance-i_n_33
94
>> 10.html> when you take out the provision that I authored in the House
in
>> Title I to create regional, not-for-profit purchasing pools, where
you
>> can have hundreds of thousands of people aggregate and negotiate
together
>> on behalf of whatever their insurance plans are, you take the guts of
>> that out."
>>
>>
>> ==========================
>>
>>
>> At 09:55 PM 10/24/2010, you wrote:
>>
>>
>> Republicans only care about people right before they're born
and
>> right before they die. In between-----you're on your own.
>>
>> EVERY major piece of legislation that has helped non-wealthy
>> people in the past 100 years have come from Democrats, whether it be
>> social security, minimum wage, worker's compensation, unemployment
>> compensation, fair housing, voting rights, civil rights, family
leave,
>> the NLRA that allows workers to unionize, etc.
>>
>> For the life of me I will never understand why there are so
many
>> idiotic chickens who will go and vote for Colonel Sanders.
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk
>> [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bill Shaw
>> [[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2010 8:19 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Distortions and lies about health care reform
>>
>> Health Care and the Campaign<
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/opinion/24sun1.html?th&emc=th
>> <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/24/opinion/24sun1.html?th&emc=th> >
>> Republicans and special interests are spreading so many
>> distortions and lies about health care reform that it is little
wonder if
>> voters are anxious and confused.
>>
>> This is the kind of thing that may result in a Republican
>> Congress . . . how soon they forget.
>>
>
>
|
