How do you kill 11 million people?

August 19, 2012

This could never happen in America???

I just finished a recent book by Andy Andrews titled; "How Do You Kill 11 MILLION PEOPLE?" I assumed correctly that it must be referring to the Holocaust when the Nazis led by Hitler exterminated millions of Jews. The number seemed odd though, because I remembered the holocaust involving six million Jews murdered by these truly evil humans. Andrews explains that the Nazis also murdered another 5+ million people, including any group considered as undesirables. These included Gypsies, Catholics, Jehovah's Witnesses, homosexuals, mentally and physically disabled, and others. He reminds us that only about 10% of the German population actually belonged to the Nazi party. He also reminds us of a few other similar horrible slaughters that have happened in other nations in just the past hundred years. These include: Three million killed in North Korea. More than a million each in Mexico, Pakistan, and the Baltic States. Three million in Cambodia. Nearly 62 million in the former Soviet Union. Two million Armenians murdered in Turkey. And, nobody knows for sure how many, many millions of Chinese were murdered by their leaders. In most cases, a single leader along with a small group of loyal followers were able to conceive and execute the plans for these unthinkable atrocities...always in search of expanding and continuing power for themselves.

Mr. Andrews' original question posed by his book's title was not literally asking how the holocaust victims were killed. He was actually asking why they so easily allowed it to happen. They seldom fought back or even tried to escape. He wonders how that could be possible? The answer he provides is chillingly simple...they were lied to by the Nazis. These Nazi monsters repeatedly told these poor victims to be that they were in no danger and, desperate to believe, they did as they were told. Initially they agreed to be identified within whatever sub-group they belonged, and to wear a cloth marker on their clothing (Jews with their gold stars, others with different colors and symbols). Next they submitted to being collected and segregated into the ghettos. Finally, they allowed themselves to meekly be transported to the actual death camps. During all of these events they were told repeatedly they were in no danger and if they simply went along and followed orders they would be safe. And so, these poor innocent people were led, like sheep, to their slaughter.

Most of these victims likely thought that these atrocities could never happen where they lived...just as most Americans must feel today. In every case the vast majority of unaffected citizens looked away. perhaps they simply did not want to risk the same fate. Perhaps because they had no weapons to fight back with. Or, perhaps because they too were prejudiced.

This could never happen here...could it? After all, what did we do to the American Indians? What did we do during WW II, when our government shipped all Japanese-American citizens to special camps for their "safe-keeping"?

Just be reminded that we 300+ million Americans are totally dependent on the laws, regulations, and executive orders created by a mere 545 human beings (one president, nine Supreme Court justices, 100 senators, and 435 member of the House of Representatives). Those currently holding office and those who preceded them over the past few decades are collectively responsible for every long term problem our nation faces today. They and their successors are also the only ones who can either solve our problems or allow them to worsen. Current partisan politics certainly suggests the latter. Some day in the future, when Americans finally stand and proclaim that enough is enough, how do you suppose those collectively in power will respond? How far might they go to retain their corrupting power? Is it truly impossible that, as happened in Germany, we will never pick a leader who, while promising to fix all problems, turns out to be as evil as Hitler? German voters did not know much about Hitler, but conditions were awful following WW I, and most felt like they could not do worse. Were they ever wrong.

Mr. Andrews opens his book by quoting; "You shall know the truth, and it shall set you free". He then goes on to point out what happens when you invert this principle; "When you don't know the truth, its absence can place you in bondage." Now connect that thought to what you observe in America every day from the mainstream media, our elected leaders, and both political parties.

I am not pointing a finger of blame at a single person or party, because almost all elected and both parties are corrupted by the power they hold and are so desperate to maintain. Individually and collectively they lie to us every single day by saying whatever is needed to keep our vote.

Our only real weapon, of course, is that vote. To continue to pick sides and blame all the leaders and the followers of the "other" party is playing right into the real power's hands. We must find the courage to vote out all incumbents. Until our supposed representatives in DC know by our actions that we control their power...we have no chance. We are all being played as suckers by both parties and most of us don't even see it!

These are my opinions. What do you think?

Mike Tower

Campaign Advice For Mr. Romney

August 12, 2012

Campaign Advice For Mr. Romney

Mitt, I am sure that you are up to your neck in well-intended advice from your campaign team. It seems these days that much of this conventional advice is based on the daily minute-by-minute voter's polls. It must be tempting to get caught up in believing that the only way to win voter's support is to then couch your campaign rhetoric in ways that pleases the largest number of voters, and offends the fewest. I believe this is referred to as being all things to all people.

To this ordinary citizen it seems clear that your campaign team has a three pronged strategy; 1. Strongly encourage you to find ways to come across to the majority of Americans as if you are an ordinary person just like them. They apparently want you to adopt colloquialisms and phrases and tell jokes intended to show that you are indeed just an ordinary, every day American that we can relate to...and more importantly like. 2. Denigrate Mr. Obama's ineffectiveness at every opportunity. 3. Describe what you intend to do to reverse Mr. Obama's specific failed actions.

The first tactic, this quest to become likeable, caused me to think back to former Presidents such as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. Can you, in your wildest dreams, imagine them even considering worrying about such an issue? These two knew they had strengths that had been proven by their life's actions that distinguished them from the average citizens...and they behaved accordingly. Clearly each of them was elected to lead our nation because they were perceived to bring a strong set of personal values, strengths, and judgement to this important job. Reading the many writings by third parties about these two, neither appeared to be particularly likable, or to much worry about it. As for tactic two, Mitt, you are wasting your time in constantly reminding us of Mr.Obama's failed policies. Don't sell us short. We all see the evidence of failed policies from both sides, and the broken economic system that is not creating jobs, and we are all worried about our's and our children's future. What we need to hear from you are your specific plans for fixing the problems. Lastly, harping on simply undoing the health care law may be your undoing...unless you have a clear and credible vision of what to replace it with. Going forward with the new law that so favors the health care industry's special interests is not acceptable, but neither is going back to the broken system we had before that did the exact same thing...but on a smaller scale.

Mitt, you know our nation is in very deep economic trouble. Our citizens are justifiably afraid for their family's futures. Most of us aren't desperate to elect someone we can relate to and like as a person. We don't need for you to pretend to be an ordinary American...because you aren't and cannot be that person. You are what you are; born into a wealthy family, highly educated, a successful capitalist, a former governor, and a person with proven strong religious and family values. You have demonstrated by your life experiences and results that you understand how capitalism and government works. You have shown that you know how to successfully make the difficult decisions needed to turn failures in both around, how to grow a company from inception, and how to control costs and when to cut your losses. These are the requirements for the type of leadership America needs today in order to improve our economy, create jobs, reduce our debts and deficits and, ensure that our entitlement promises are met.

In the process of becoming a successful businessman, you have become fabulously wealthy and have then done exactly what the majority of informed Americans (even St. Buffett) do every year in legally taking advantage of the laws and regulations available to protect that wealth from taxation. It isn't cheating, it's called tax avoidance not tax evasion, and to not do so, if not considered almost un-American, would have been stupid. I don't think the majority of Americans resent your success. They might envy it, but most would love to emulate it.

Mitt, in summary, you need to stop campaigning with the objective of attacking Mr. Obama and trying to portray yourself as a likeable ordinary American, and get on with telling us what you will do as the CEO of America to repair our many problems. Show us the confident strong leader that has been so successful in the private and public sector. Our nation needs an experienced capable leader with a credible plan today more then ever. You have those skills and, hopefully, are that person...now just get on with proving that to us.

As for the constant mudslinging from the opposition...leave the response tactics to the Super Pacs. The next time Mr. Obama accuses you of being non-transparent for not sharing all of your tax records; tell him this...Mr. Obama, you show the American people your transcripts, school applications, passports, social security card, and birth certificate...and I'll show them all of that and my tax records!!

To all voters, if you owned a large, formerly successful, company that had serious survival-threatening problems, who would you most trust to turn it around, Mr. Obama or Mr. Romney?

These are my opinions. What do you think?

Mike Tower

Do many regret voting for Mr. Obama?

August 5, 2012

How many regret voting for Mr. Obama?

In 2008, predictably, most Democratic voters were very disappointed in the Bush administration. So too were many Republicans and Independents because many of them believed that he and the Republican party had lost their way. We had entered two wars that made no sense that were squandering the health and lives of our military men and women and taxpayer's money on wars that could never be won. The No Child Left Behind Act was becoming exposed as a failure, the Medicare Prescription Drug bill was an entitlement that most rational voters knew was unaffordable, and the housing bubble grew and burst under his watch (yes Bush repeatedly warned the Democratic controlled congress...but that was an ineffective response). All of these actions combined with the weak McCain-Palin ticket, and the promise for hope and change from the first black candidate for our highest office, led to Mr. Obama becoming our president. To even his least ardent supporters it seemed that we could hardly do worse as a nation under Obama than we had under Bush. I'm guessing that somewhere in some voter's consciousness was the hopeful image of Nelson Mandela who had come into office in South Africa and proved to be such a great unifier of that country's politics and people.

Sadly, Mr. Obama quickly proved that he is no Nelson Mandela. Instead of uniting our political leaders and followers he did just the opposite. Instead he can easily be described as the great divider and blamer (Bush caused it all, or those intransigent Republicans are at fault). He quickly drew a line in the sand and said to the Republican lawmakers by words and actions...we won, you lost, now get out of the way. He then proceeded to push an agenda pitting the poor against the wealthy, and even managed to further the racial divide in our nation, not only between blacks and whites, he also appealed to Hispanics to join the Democrats against "them".

Mr. Obama reminds me of some of the many extremely well-educated people I have encountered during my long life who were judged by themselves and others to be smart because of their academic achievements. However, I have also observed that to have achieved academic success does not automatically mean that one has the necessary shared values, common sense, practical experience, judgment, integrity, and finally accumulated wisdom needed to actually be effective as a leader. It comes down to the simple fact that being able to memorize and regurgitate information in order to achieve academic success doesn't mean nearly as much as the other ingredients mentioned. Mr. Obama did have one positive key factor for his success in getting elected. As LeRoy Goldman pointed out in an article several weeks ago...he had lots of luck. If his U.S. Senate race opponent had not withdrawn from that race in disgrace, if Hillary hadn't bombed out in Iowa, if President Bush hadn't left behind such a dismal image, and finally, if McCain-Palin had not been such weak opponents...hope and change wouldn't have had a chance.

Look at Mr. Obama's two crowning achievements; The stimulus and health care reform laws. He handed off responsibility for writing these critically complex bills to Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. And they did what was expected and enlisted the help of the lobbyists for the special interest's most affected. Predictably, these new laws then significantly favored those same special interests instead of our citizens. In the end, the stimulus package did not help to stimulate the economy in ways that created jobs, just as Obamacare will not improve health care delivery for the vast majority of our citizens. Clearly, Mr. Obama, even with a majority of his party in control of both houses from the two years preceding his election through the first two years he was in office, and a continuing majority in the Senate even now, has failed to deliver positive results for anyone but the special interests. The reasons for his poor performance are simple, first he did not have the courage to confront the special interests, and he had no clue about how to turn our economy around. He had almost never worked in the private sector, let alone led a capitalistic organization. How would he be expected to know what to do. He could have, of course, surrounded himself with experienced business turn-around experts, but instead he chose to appoint mainly loyalists, and intellectual academic types who shared his vision of a more socialist economy for America. The net results are that America's economy and our nation's citizen's futures have never been more threatened.

I read his two books; "Dreams from My Father, and "the Audacity of Hope" recently, and learned from his own words how he views the world, and can only conclude that it was predictable how he would choose to lead our nation. His lack of practical experience combined with his socialized agenda have been verified by his words, actions, and results. He has proven that he is more interested in social change than repairing our economy and creating jobs. What do you want; bigger government and a weaker private sector with fewer jobs, or the opposite?

Can we afford any more hope and change?

These are my opinions. What do you think?

Mike Tower

Hendersonville, NC

Please visit:

Citizens Against Politics As Usual

Lee's Political Opinion

Maybe America's problems aren't so bad?

July 29, 2012

Maybe things aren't so bad after all?

I have been accused by some readers of being too pessimistic. I thought about that at length and decided that in this article I would focus on the positive aspects of some of our nation's challenges.

For example, instead of focusing on the 30 million Americans who have no health insurance, let's remember that over 90% of all Americans do have some form of insurance coverage. By the way, about half of all American's health coverage is provided by Medicare, Medicaid, Government Employee, and the VA health care systems...those dreaded public options! Instead of worrying about the 25 million or so who do not enjoy full employment, remember that over 125 million Americans are working...albeit with wages that have been stagnant for well over a decade. Instead of focusing on the roughly 50% of workers paying no federal income taxes, let's celebrate the positive fact that almost half of all working Americans make enough money to be able pay these taxes, and lets make them pay even more. Instead of bemoaning the trillions of dollars that have been spent on our last two wasted wars, lets be happy that both of these are winding down and the citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan are now far better off than before we came...aren't they? Let's stop being so worried about the state of our children's education. Let's just ask for more federal involvement, encourage more unions, stronger tenure rules, lower teacher pay, more end point testing, and even less parental involvement. After all, how important is it to worry about our kids and grandkids receiving the types of quality education that will actually prepare them to live productive adult lives in our rapidly changing global environment? Instead of continuing to be upset at the fact that over 12 million illegal immigrants have been allowed/encouraged to enter our country over the past three decades, look at the money we saved by not enforcing our borders, and the fact that with the economy remaining weak, fewer and fewer are now coming to America. Instead of being unhappy with the fluctuating cost of gasoline, let's keep buying gas guzzlers. Housing values underwater...look at the bright side, housing prices have never been lower...what a great buying opportunity. Now if we could just create jobs and convince those darn banks to start lending money again we might actually sell more homes and drive prices higher. If you were unhappy that none of the bankers, Wall Street types, and even some of our culpable elected officials were charged with any crimes or had to serve even a day in jail for their role in creating the housing bubble that nearly sank our nation...look at the bright side about how much this helped reduce jail and prison over-crowding. If you are unhappy at the OWS crowd going after the 1%? Look at the positive fact that they haven't yet decided to go after the top 30%. We should all celebrate the creation of ethanol as the renewable replacement for gasoline. Let's ignore the fact that it costs more energy than it saves to produce. Let's also ignore the fact that this has reduced the amount of corn and other competing grains available for foodstuffs...resulting in significantly higher food prices. The best news here is that the EPA has not raised the allowable ethanol levels to 20 or 25% instead of the 15% currently approved. Let's celebrate the fact that only about a fourth of our children now live in households whose income falls below the poverty line. More good news; our national debt is only $16 trillion. I say only because it has been projected by the OMB to increase by about one trillion dollars per year for the coming decade. Thus $16trillion will seem like chicken feed compared to the projected $26 trillion by 2022.

We should be ecstatic that in spite of an approval rating of less than 10% for our federally elected lawmakers...we continue to re-elect incumbents over 90% of the time. Think of the pleasure this brings to them and their families, and the powerful special interests who don't have to worry about training new lawmakers to follow their orders. Finally we also should be grateful that the two parties are so frozen in partisan politics. If they were not, who else could we blame for all of our problems? Surely we wouldn't look in a mirror...would we??

Hmm...maybe I am a pessimist. But if so I'm an optimistic one because I am certainly positive that one cannot look at these irrefutable facts and not conclude that something is terribly wrong with our nation. If you disagree please let me know what you see that I am missing. I would prefer optimism over pessimism any day...I just need some evidence.

I can't wait for my Ostrich-like (oops...optimists) friends to read this...though, it's likely that they have their heads buried so deeply in the sand that they won't see what is so clearly visible anyway?? Haven't you found in your own life experience that ignoring problems usually makes them become less problematic?

As usual, these are my opinions. What do you think?

Mike Tower

Hendersonville, NC

America's drought and its effects on corn and people

July 24, 2012

The Great Drought: Unintended Consequences?

As we all know by now our nation's corn belt is experiencing the worst drought in over 50 years.

The likely result will be a massive reduction in our corn harvest. This reduction in supply has simple economic consequences...prices for every corn-based product will increase dramatically. In addition to paying more for corn based foods, we will, of course, pay more for ethanol too. One has to give credit to the corn industry which for decades invented idea after idea to increase demand and prices for their product. Corn-based food product types have expanded for decades as more and more recipes were developed that used corn, and high fructose corn syrup massively replaced cane sugar. Then came the grandest idea of all; using corn to create ethanol that could then be substituted for gasoline. Can't you imagine these marketeers sitting around a table brainstorming ideas on how to create even more demand for their product? After all, in most capitalistic organizations, the quest for growth is an absolute constant. Suddenly a light bulb went off and someone reminded the group that the idea for producing a gasoline substitute using corn ethanol had been around as long as the automobile. The problem had always been that it cost more to produce ethanol than gasoline and thus it could not compete on price. Then the group began to think outside the box. What if, they asked, we could develop traction for an idea of substituting ethanol for gasoline because of global warming. We could certainly get the environmentalists to back the idea. What if we also sold the idea as a way of helping reduce our dependence on foreign oil? Then one excited person said...we can even tout it as a source of renewable energy! Who could resist these selling points? Then some really naive member raised a red flag; we still have a problem because we cannot produce it at a price that is lower than gasoline because it takes oil based fertilizers to raise it, more oil-based energy to produce it, and then the corn has to be hauled by trucks to distilleries and, finally, the ethanol also has to be hauled by truck to the gasoline refineries because it is too corrosive for pipelines. When all these costs are added up, the red flag bearer warned, it clearly will never actually reduce oil usage or pollution.. On top of that, this naysayer at the table said, the start up costs will be very high. To all of this, the smartest person at the table said; stop worrying so much about all of this stuff. Our objective is to increase our corn markets and this is too good an idea to pass up. We'll just turn those problems over to our lobbyists and lawyers to deal with. Of course, here's what these two groups then did; first, they had to get all of the lawmakers in the corn-producing states to support a bill that would provide government subsidies to get production distilleries built and running. Then they had to promise to make major contributions to candidates for the executive branch, and both houses of congress...for both parties. Then they coordinated campaigns by environmentalists to bring extreme pressure on the lawmakers. At the same time they launched media campaigns to demonize the oil industry, and to sell the benefits to American citizens in order to gain their support. By the time they were done it would have been un-American to even think of speaking out against this idea.

The idea was rapidly transformed from an idea to a reality today that affects every American and even the poorer inhabitants of the world who depend on our exported corn as a food staple. Prices have, as would be expected, climbed steadily higher. Corn crops have also grown commensurate with expanded demand. Prices for even non-corn grains have also skyrocketed as farmers grew less of these grains in order to convert to corn production. Our leaders obviously did agree to this idea that they were paid to support. Subsidies were created as requested by producers to help build and operate distilleries that could not have existed otherwise. And our leaders then convinced the EPA to now allow up to 15% of ethanol in every gallon of gasoline.

Now we have the great drought! Guess what will now happen to the prices of every grain-based product we consume? Most experts predict that ethanol will soon end up costing more per gallon than the gasoline it replaces, and in most states it's not just EPA allowed...it's required (thanks to lobbying at the state level). It leaves one to ponder just how much longer we will allow this corruption to continue unabated. Once again, both party's leaders, supposedly the smartest people around, have proven that they will buy into and support almost any idea if they are paid enough to do so. They clearly don't give a tinker's damn about what's truly best for we the people!

Our leaders predictable response will be that nobody can predict the weather because it is just an act of nature. They used to say an act of God...but that is now politically incorrect. Were the consequences unintended, unanticipated, or simply ignored? Are our leaders stupid or crooked? Either should get you fired.

These are my opinions. What do you think?

Mike Tower

Hendersonville, NC

Americans need to vote out incumbents

July 15, 2012

Why I support voting out incumbents

If you have read many of my articles, you know that my consistent general theme has been that in order for voters to help solve our nations many problems we need to unite in firing all incumbent federally elected officials beginning with the coming fall elections. Most American voters are angered and frustrated by our lawmakers overall performance, but some then argue that some are OK and should be saved. This article is written to better explain why I feel so strongly about supporting this drastic action.

Over the past couple of years, many, many readers have sent me their very well developed ideas that, if implemented, would likely solve most of our challenges. Many said, in effect, that we didn't need to fire everyone...we just need to convince our elected to do these things. Since our representatives have failed miserably to respond to our anger, how do we get that accomplished? I am a pragmatic and practical business person. I spent over thirty eight years in the private sector working in five different industries, during which I held over 20 different management roles in just about every business function you can think of. I was repeatedly told by my bosses that I was valued because I was very good at solving problems.

I was trained to evaluate negative results by identifying their primary underlying causes, and when the most important causal factor was identified, to then determine the most effective options to remove or modify that cause. It was while evaluating our nation's problems with this approach that I had my personal "Ah Ha!" moment. It became clear to me that most of us see all the laws and regulations that need to be changed. We simply lack the willingness and effective leadership to implement them. Our two political parties remain locked in a desperate struggle to retain as much power as possible, and the vast majority of our elected politicians from both parties are more interested in staying in power than risking the needed collaborative actions necessary to pass the laws and regulations so desperately required. The parties and their politicians have learned from long experience that we will re-elect them over 90% of the time anyway, and that they must fear the lobbies more than the voters.

It dawned on me that we voters only have one single effective tool at our disposal and that is the ballot. We the people cannot pass a single law or regulation...that is solely in the control of our elected representatives.

That led me to my conclusion that as long as we are no real threat to their power, why would we expect them to pay any attention to our complaints...or even bother to listen to our suggestions or ideas. The fact is that they, quite accurately I might add, only fear the monied special interests who fund their campaigns...because these folks will withhold funding at the first sign that a politician isn't following their orders. Where does that leave we the people? I'm afraid it leaves us to either continue the frustrating and non-productive game we have been playing of just blaming all those in the other party...or to stand up and take the necessary actions to send a strong signal to all future candidates and current office holders that we can and will fire them...by doing just that! Those we elect to represent our collective best interests would suddenly realize that we the voters can and will fire them if they fail to act accordingly. After this process has begun the metrics that we should use in the future to measure our lawmaker's performance will be fairly easy to create and help guide our future election decisions. For those who could never imagine voting for a candidate in the opposite party...just vote out your party's incumbent in a primary.

I know that this likely seems too simple and unrealistic and many will suggest that we will just be sending new crooks to Washington. I do not believe that most of our politicians intend to behave like crooks. It is the system they are forced to work within that is corrupt, and that corruption is created by the powerful special interests and the political parties themselves. It seems pretty clear that the folks we have been re-electing for term after term from either party do effectively say the words supporting their followers personal values...but they have clearly not delivered the goods for a very long time and I don't think they can or will change their behavior without our help.

Clearly we will risk losing a few good and decent people currently in office. However, being nice or good but ineffective should still get you fired! By signaling with our ballot that we can and will take action to replace incumbents is what will force the rest to be reminded that they serve at our pleasure...not just that of the special interests. Frankly I don't think it would take more than one or two waves of firings before the survivors would get the message. For the faint of heart, please stand aside. Our nation is in a war for it's very survival. Politics as usual, either for politicians or voters, is clearly no longer an acceptable alternative.

These are my opinions. What do you think?

Mike Tower

The implications of Obamacare

July 8, 2012

The health care bill implications

The Supreme Court has approved the health care bill that is commonly known as Obamacare with two exceptions. The first, deals with the wording in the law requiring that a penalty be paid by anyone who could afford to, but then chose not to buy insurance. The court stated that the penalty would have to be called what it actually is...a tax. The second removes from the law the threat that said, in effect, if a state fails to expand its Medicaid offering as part of the health care expansion, they would lose all federal monies currently being paid to them for the program...that amounts to 90% of the state's costs for medicaid. These two exceptions will prove to be critically important as this important debate continues.

Mr. Obama and his fellow Democrats are lauding this as a victory for the American people. The Republicans are, of course, proclaiming it to be a disaster of epic proportions. This will result in this issue being a significant debating point for both sides in the remaining months of the election. We must all hope that the more important issues such as jobs, debt, and unfunded entitlements aren't ignored.

Since it is pretty clear that the health care and Insurance lobbies led the process of writing this bill in their favor are the primary winners. Their enthusiasm, however, has to be tempered by the fear of the Republican's promises to repeal the law if they win a majority of both houses and the presidency. Any bets on where these same special interests will be placing their support this fall? Any doubts about what a GOP candidate will have to promise in return for their financial support?

It's easy to see that the 10% of Americans without insurance have also won. Who are the losers? Well, let's begin by looking at the other 90% of Americans who currently have some form of health insurance. Does anyone imagine that this majority population isn't about to see the beginning of the most incredible negative changes to their health care imaginable? The President stated before and after the court's decision that folks who are already insured will be allowed to keep their insurance. He, of course, did not say that this majority will have to bear most of the burden for all of these newly insured via higher costs or reduced services, or both. Can you imagine that insurance providers of all types will not end up raising fees to make up for expected higher costs? Do you think that the number of employers providing health insurance in this new reality will increase or decrease? It doesn't matter if you happen to be covered by private, Medicare, Medicaid, Government, or the VA; you might be able to maintain coverage, but these all will be affected by higher costs and reduced services. It's a simple matter of economics; our nation is deeply in debt and cannot afford to pay for these additional insureds and increased services for baby boomers without additional revenues and/or reduced services. Think about the supply of primary care providers required by the growing twin demands of the newly insured and the baby boomers. The supply of primary care providers has for many years been failing to grow at a rate that even matches current demand. In America today, driven by shrinking reimbursement rates for service, our primary care specialists are among the lowest paid of all physicians. Why would anyone logically want to make this their chosen medical specialty? During these very trying economic times it seems indisputable that this new law initiates a period of declining quality of health care for the vast majority of all Americans for the foreseeable future.

Last year I wrote a series of articles dealing with health care realities in our nation. I stated that we are the only developed country in the world not providing universal health care for all of it's citizens. Clearly that must not be allowed to continue in a nation that remains, in spite of our problems, the wealthiest in the world. To me this requirement to provide health care access for all citizens falls under the “Life” portion of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” sentence of our Declaration of Independence. However, for our leaders to have created this version of health care reforms that more benefits the powerful special interests than the vast majority of our people is not the best way accomplish that goal. We have transferred all control of our health care into the hands of the politicians, bureaucrats, and the insurance and health care industries. As I wrote then, and am even more convinced today, the right thing to do would be to offer everyone a Medicare option. After all, over half of all Americans are already on some form of public health coverage when you include those covered by Medicare, Medicaid, Government, and the VA. The infrastructure is already in place, and most current recipients think that these health care delivery systems work pretty well. The real negative of that option would, of course, be for the special interests...and they certainly are more capable of influencing the lawmakers than we the people. Meanwhile we just keep voting the incumbents back into office?? Will we never learn?

These are my opinions. What do you think?

Mike Tower

Please also check out:

Citizens Against Politics As Usual

Lee's Political Opinion