After many days of debate, deliberation, and indecisiveness there is finally a stimulus package. It totaled about 787 billion dollars of government spending and tax cuts. People on the left of the political aisle hail this as a package that will generate and maintain jobs. They repeat the Obama administration's claim that this package will create or save 3 million jobs. As with all pieces of legislation the other side of the political spectrum has its problems with the package. They claim that it demands the nation continue to spend money although a majority of their spending is borrowed money. They also claim there is not enough tax breaks to small business and individual citizens. These mostly Republican law-makers feel as though they were shut out of the decision making process in creating this package, and argued that for President Obama to be politically non-partisan, they feel this bill was "hi-jacked" by Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi and congressional Democrats.
On the state level this bill is also met with mixed reviews. Democratic governors across the nation, praise the bill as they face statewide furloughs and budget shortfalls. Some Republican governors including Alaska's Sarah Palin and Louisiana's Bobby Jindal have gone so far to refuse a portion of the money being given by the federal government. The aforementioned governors don't agree with the permanent expansion of unemployment benefits on a statewide level. They acknowledge that the federal government will pay for the expansions now, but when the stimulus money is no longer there, they worry that they the states will be left footing the bill. Meanwhile Florida governor Charlie Crist has broken from his party to support the President and the stimulus. On a recent appearance on Meet the Press Crist acknowledged he had some concerns about the stimulus but warned that inaction at this critical time would be worst than a bill with some flaws.
Despite all of this, little has been said about the way the bill will impact specific communities. As the nation looks at about a 7% unemployment rate the Black community faces an unemployment at 14%. While about 80% of White Students graduate high school, only around 53% of Black students complete that same level of education. With this type of disparity there is a special and unique need to ensure that the stimulus package is benefiting all Americans the same. The nation as a whole needs help, but the Black community is in a dire state that needs a specific type of attention. Southern Christian Leadership Conference President-Emeritus Joseph Lowery says "when America stubs its toe, Black people break their foot, when America has a cold, Black people have pneumonia." These numbers suggest that Rev. Lowery's words have never been more appropriate.
What needs to happen now is those progressive organizations who worked so hard for President Obama to get elected need to do their part. NAACP chapters on college campuses and in cities and states need to keep track of the money proposed to benefit the urban and rural underserved communities. Organizations such as the National Urban League should not only track but post the flow of capital from the stimulus bill. This is an arena even hip-hop artist should get into. Hip-hop artist are among the best and brightest, if not the best and brightest when it comes to marketing and promotions. They employ street teams to hang posters on lightpoles and flood city streets with promotional materials. They can also employ these same street teams to post information in and around the cities and suburbs as to how money will be coming into and being used in the Black community. Black Churches can contribute by reading the information pertinent to their community during their morning announcements. Fraternities and Sororities can even have moments during their step shows that stop and inform the audience how the stimulus is being used in and around the community.
This is something that every citizen can do. Once the information is spread around, the hope or idea is that people who are struggling in the community can know where to go to get some form of help or aid. Another benefit of knowing is that if the money is not reaching or impacting Black communities, Black voters can be informed and hold their elected politicians accountable for that during the next election. Ultimately this should be something every voter and community should be engaged in. Regardless of their race color or creed. With so drastic of economic times, now more than ever should all citizens, but specifically Black citizens be engaged, aware and active. Now is the time that organizations and groups who advocate on behalf Black Americans stand up and earn their keep. Now is the time that these organizations be of service to humanity.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
With Liberty and Health Care for All
Amid all the talk about stimulus and the debate on Capitol Hill about the most effective way to create jobs, one important campaign topic is being ignored in much of the mainstream media. The issue of health care has been pushed to the background of much of public political discourse in favor of the ongoing economic troubles. However a recent study done by the research arm of the California Nurses Association shows us that those two issues may not be as mutually exclusive as once thought. Their study chronicles how the single payer system of health care can not only solve the current health care crisis but also the economic crisis.
For those unfamiliar with health care talk, the single payer system refers to the government being the sole financial provider for everyone's medical needs. This is an idea that has been supported by many for quite some time and with good merit. Such elected officials as Congressman Dennis Kucinich(D-OH) and former Congresswoman and Green Party Candidate for president Cynthia McKinney as well as current Senator Bernie Sanders have all supported at one time or another the single payer system. If the single payer system could help the economic peril the United States is in, there is little argument as to the effectiveness of such a change in health care policy.
The actual research done by the Institute for Health and Socio-Economic Policy make a compelling argument as to the financial benefits of the single payer system. The first point they make is of the impending job growth that would result. The study claims that 45 million new jobs would be created directly into the health care industry as well as to other related industries. The study also shows that this job creation would provide the needed boost in tax revenue that so many local, state and federal governments desperately need. According to the study in 2006 alone, taxes from the health care sector totaled $824 billion dollars.
In addition to the growth and stimulant it can be to the economy, converting to a health care for all single payer system would actually cost less money than many of the "bail-outs" that are going on now. To convert the nation to a single payer system would cost the government about $63 billion dollars. Mind you, this is after AIG was given $150 billion and Citigroup was given $350 billion. In fact, if the federal government only sought to provide for the 47 million Americans who do not currently have health care, than the price tag would go down to about $44 billion. All of these figures don't begin to address the money private business owners would save in real profit since they don't have to worry about insurance packages for their employees.
Through all of this analysis we haven't begun to touch on the social relevance of having a healthy society. I understand that in the United States the business of America is business. However some things should be so necessary to everyday life that they simply shouldn't be "for-profit". The health and welfare of a society is one of those things. Generally, this type of issue is largely debated by conservatives who aren't for the type of government spending it would take to do something like this, but even the most cynical observer would agree that the United States is already in a "spend or die" situation. Since the nation must spend, why not do it in a way that not only address the economic needs but finally puts an end to ridiculous reality that one of the richest nations on Earth has some of the poorest health care around. This should be the type of bi-partisan effort everyone rushes to get behind.
To read the study for yourself:
http://www.calnurses.org/research/pdfs/ihsp_sp_economic_study_2009.pdf
For those unfamiliar with health care talk, the single payer system refers to the government being the sole financial provider for everyone's medical needs. This is an idea that has been supported by many for quite some time and with good merit. Such elected officials as Congressman Dennis Kucinich(D-OH) and former Congresswoman and Green Party Candidate for president Cynthia McKinney as well as current Senator Bernie Sanders have all supported at one time or another the single payer system. If the single payer system could help the economic peril the United States is in, there is little argument as to the effectiveness of such a change in health care policy.
The actual research done by the Institute for Health and Socio-Economic Policy make a compelling argument as to the financial benefits of the single payer system. The first point they make is of the impending job growth that would result. The study claims that 45 million new jobs would be created directly into the health care industry as well as to other related industries. The study also shows that this job creation would provide the needed boost in tax revenue that so many local, state and federal governments desperately need. According to the study in 2006 alone, taxes from the health care sector totaled $824 billion dollars.
In addition to the growth and stimulant it can be to the economy, converting to a health care for all single payer system would actually cost less money than many of the "bail-outs" that are going on now. To convert the nation to a single payer system would cost the government about $63 billion dollars. Mind you, this is after AIG was given $150 billion and Citigroup was given $350 billion. In fact, if the federal government only sought to provide for the 47 million Americans who do not currently have health care, than the price tag would go down to about $44 billion. All of these figures don't begin to address the money private business owners would save in real profit since they don't have to worry about insurance packages for their employees.
Through all of this analysis we haven't begun to touch on the social relevance of having a healthy society. I understand that in the United States the business of America is business. However some things should be so necessary to everyday life that they simply shouldn't be "for-profit". The health and welfare of a society is one of those things. Generally, this type of issue is largely debated by conservatives who aren't for the type of government spending it would take to do something like this, but even the most cynical observer would agree that the United States is already in a "spend or die" situation. Since the nation must spend, why not do it in a way that not only address the economic needs but finally puts an end to ridiculous reality that one of the richest nations on Earth has some of the poorest health care around. This should be the type of bi-partisan effort everyone rushes to get behind.
To read the study for yourself:
http://www.calnurses.org/research/pdfs/ihsp_sp_economic_study_2009.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
