Over the last few days and months President Obama has engaged the political process with change that we can believe in. In the early days of his administration there have been missteps, there have been mistakes and there have been faulty judgements due to the feeling out process that all administrations have. This is inevitable,m as the dragon called Washington DC is a huge leviathan to tame or even understand.
Yet, there are those who have systematically tried to call his efforts a failure and in some cases pray all will fail, for the sake of America. As an American, voter, producer, family man I find the aforementioned thoughts counter productive. I believe in the change Obama is pressing and to have real change is to cease with the typical and volatile comments of the past. We have a Black President so yes we can and yes we did negates everything of the past. Jesus said it best;"let the dead bury the dead." No there has to be a clearer explanation that race, creed, color or origin does not address. I would like to suggest that all of the current issues are a battle between two very powerful ideas from two very influential writers. The first is Immanuel Kant the second John Bentham. These two philosophers are in conflict because they demand we as people choose between two very difficult choices: consequence (Bentham) and obligation (Kant).
In the book "The Happiness Hypothesis", John Haidt argues that we a hard time in making those two choices. To be obligated creates consequences: one has to win; others have to not win. This I believe is the root cause of political struggle within this country. There was a time when 44 years ago the Congress could pass medical insurance (Medicaid/Medicare) for those who were in need. As Obama said in an interview in Time Magazine (August 3, 2009) there was more discipline then. The needs of accomplishment were the driving force and the good of the country was at the forefront. Also as now LBJ had a margin of Democrats to work with and also Republicans of like mind too. Thus came the Great Society and the legislation which rescued Americans from poverty. Again we have the same opportunity to rescue the poor among us. Although there are people that have health insurance and the latest poll number declares that 83% like their insurance (same Time magazine issue) there are still 15% of Americans with no insurance or who are underinsured in the Nation. This is a dilemma. If nothing happens there will be a drain on the hospitals and higher cost that gets passed to the consumer; this is the cost of doing business. If we do something the Insurance Companies, fiscal conservatives (Blue Dos Democrats) and the attack dogs on the right will water down the effort, giving a bill that has no teeth and therefore no help, or just barely giving to the effort. Again, the consequences versus obligation.
So, what is the choice? How do we balance the needs of the many with the needs of the few, or can we? The battle rages on and is more spicy because of race. Do not fool yourself, race is a factor. The fact that a black man is calling the shots reminds some of the stereotype of persons of color: lazy, shiftless, and baby makers for more money. To be truthful, there may have been persons of that nature, there always will be and that is unfortunate. But, for the most part persons in this trap (generation) are there because they are. The question is can we as a society come to an agreement and help all who want to and need help.
A Nation is judged on how it treats the least of these. With the rise of baby boomers aging and the lack of jobs to support the growing Medicare/Medicaid rolls, retirement systems and the like the call to action is greater now than in the 1930's. My hope is that we strike a balance to provide for all Americans or if not then we will perish for lack of vision and the damnation of not caring for the least of these. Later
No comments:
Post a Comment