Labels: healthcare

Labels: 2008, women

No, what sent me into a free fall of depression was CNN's instinct for the fatuous in choosing the debate questions. It is a disgrace that in a two-hour debate (it felt longer) there was not a single question about the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, the powder keg in Pakistan or Iran. The fault is not with the earnest YouTubers who sent in questions. The blame entirely rests with Anderson Cooper (a debate host who seemed incapable of asking a relevant follow-up question) and his CNN cohorts, who seemed more concerned with goosing the ratings than with grasping the world that the next president will inherit.

And, please God, no more debate questions about the Bible. Somewhere in the dim corridors of memory, I recall being taught (admittedly under the liberal Earl Warren Supreme Court) that there were no religious tests for holding public office in the United States. The theology was getting so thick onstage Wednesday night (with Huckabee, a Baptist minister, all but offering to give Scripture lessons to Rudy Giuliani) that I imagined that instead of commercial breaks, CNN might interrupt the debate for two minutes of public prayer.

The debate should be held in some august and inspiring place such as the American Museum of Natural History, or a great university, and should be attended primarily by people in the sciences. The format of the debate should be simple. A panel of four or five scientists, specializing in a range of disciplines from microbiology and medicine to the composition of the earth's atmosphere, would ask the candidates questions. These might be on matters of opinion, such as whether stem cell research should be encouraged, while others would be purely factual. Should a candidate respond incorrectly to a factual matter, or be incapable of responding at all, the scientist would provide the answer. If the scientists were famous, the event would be more persuasive and attractive (a Nobel Laureate or two would be good), but you would also need a scientific populist, someone like Gina Kolata, who writes about many aspects of science for the New York Times. Her job would be to translate and moderate if the scientific lingo became too arcane or the questioning too intense. In order to expand the debate, and perhaps clear up matters where educated audience members disagreed with scientific statements made by the panel, questions would be taken from the floor.

Out from behind a curtain emerges Dean, the Silver Fox himself, looking just as a hard-hitting prizefighter should. He makes his way up the stage, not at all phased by the electrified audience on all sides. The crowd quiets as the brawl begins. Pow! Iraq War. Bam! Social Injustice. Boom! Student Aid Cuts. The Silver Fox is knocking them down as they come and Republican Agenda is on the ropes. The end is near, all can feel it. The last blow is about to be dealt, and everyone waits with bated breath. Whack! Corruption. Republican Agenda is down and the mob goes wild!

Yes, youth today do watch too many movies, but to a political junkie the drama of seeing a rock star like Howard Dean perform should not be underestimated. There were three of us addicts in Milwaukee yesterday, and Dean was just the fix we needed.

Emotions ran high as the DNC Chairman refocused a group divided over primary candidates to the broader democratic message. We are the party of justice, economic responsibility, and progress. Pell grants, health care and international diplomacy are close to Dean’s heart and are in need of revitalization. But these are values that must be fought for, like the Civil Rights Act or the reintroduction of the McRib. Chairman Dean knows students will be the champions, who will hold out for the long run no matter how many blows we are dealt. I agree. If there are enough steroids in Hollywood to allow Sylvester Stallone back in the ring for Balboa, there ought to be enough gumption in young democrats too. Lace up the gloves kids, because elections are around the corner.

Labels: Assembly, healthcare, UW

Governor Doyle will be at the UW Welcome Center (21 N Park St, next to Smith Hall) tomorrow morning (Wednesday the 28th) at 10:30 to sign Assembly Bill 280.

"AB 280, also known as Michelle's Law, mandates that every health insurance policy that provides dependent coverage for a person because he or she is a full time student must continue to provide coverage for the person if he or she ceases to be a full time student because of a medically necessary leave of absence. The coverage continuation begins when the person submits documentation and certification from his or her attending physician of the medical necessity of the leave of absence."

Look for some commentary from me tomorrow after the event, as I will be speaking to offer a student perspective on the necessity of this bill. Join the College Dems at the Welcome Center tomorrow at 10:30!

Labels: Assembly, healthcare

I am writing today to commemorate someone rare in the profession of politics: a hero. On November 18, 1978, this month, twenty-nine years ago, Democratic Party Congressman Leo Ryan, representing the 11^th District of California, was shot and killed in the line of duty, while serving his San Francisco area constituents. He remains the only congressional representative in history to have done so. This by no means makes him the only office-holding hero in the US Congress' long history, or a figure that warrants political nostalgia (There are decent human beings in congress today, from both parties, despite the bad rap it frequently gets...). No, instead honoring his death requires taking a serious look at the evil that killed him and applying the lessons of its existence and Ryan's struggle against it to our own contemporary lives.

Jim Jones, a self-styled messiah, ingratiated himself with the political powers in San Francisco and gained a large following. Then, abruptly he left, taking his mostly poor, mostly black flock to a remote forest outpost in Guyana. There, Jones' paranoia escalated, especially when a delegation led by U.S. Rep. Leo J. Ryan visited in November 1978. As Ryan's group prepared to leave, trouble broke out. Ultimately, five people -- including Examiner photographer Greg Robinson [and Congressman Ryan] -- would be shot to death at an airstrip nearby, and 913 others would perish at Jonestown in a mass suicide presided over by Jones.

Yes skepticism. I am not talking about becoming a nihilist and rejecting all truths. What I am talking about is treating all arguments equally, no matter their source. An argument is an argument, beholden to both logical and emotional (gut instinct) proof – the human wielder of it should never matter if the substance of an argument is still BS. Whether it is your favorite politician, your best friend, or your parent making an argumentative claim, give them a similar burden of proof to those you are less inclined to agree with, even after accounting for the trust you might share with them. The gains from doing so are enormous. Sincerity: you only agree with what you actually agree with. Prudence: you only care to act on what you actually agree with. Trust: two people doing this at once rely on each other to keep one another's arguments accountable to reality. Life: a charismatic charlatan's lousy arguments do not get you hurt or killed.

In short, never put a person or an institution in a position of knowledge absolutism, assuming without question that its opinions are always true by default, ignoring completely the logical and emotional argumentative warrants involved. There is always the chance that anyone, even the most impressive of humans and organizations, is wrong, perhaps even malevolently so. Jim Jones and the other evil humans of history teach us this repeatedly. Others, like Congressman Ryan, offer us a more hopeful lesson.

Ryan was not only skeptical of Jones' cult when others were indifferent. When no one else would, he acted on his skepticism to serve his San Francisco constituents – many of which were in Jones' movement or were relatives of its members. When the Carter Administration and Bay Area legislators rejected his pleas for help in investigating Jones, he did so anyways with decisive persistence. He had the will to act, the will to take a flawed argument for what it was and call it out in person. It cost him his life. It is essential that at some point we are willing to take such risks, to see wrong triumphed over by logic and gut human instinct.

This post is on the blog of a partisan organization that opposes another partisan organization. The members of which might one day be in positions of power and responsibility, guided by the arguments of their superiors or advisers. Now, I recognize that being involved in a partisan organization means having to do things that are somewhat lock-in-step, regardless of the group being conservative or liberal. I also must note, however, that it is very easy for the game of partisanship to suck a person into viewing their political opponents as demons and their organization's arguments as unquestionable.

This post and the legacy of Congressman Leo Ryan, a man the Democratic Party and our great Republic should be proud to call one of their own, absolutely reject this outcome of the partisan game. A bad argument is a bad argument, it does not matter who makes it. Moreover, anyone can make a bad argument in politics, whether he or she is on your side of the political spectrum or the opposition's. The same is also true for a good argument.