Popular demand for Universal Health care – Single Payer System

April 29, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The special interests representing the insurance and the health care industry successfully thwarted the consumer demand for Single Payer System with aggressive lobbying and campaign.

It’s not hard to figure out the reason behind industry opposition to Single Payer system.

Single Payer system is the guaranteed health care for all citizens regardless of personal health and economic status.

With the 24/7 access across the nation, it effectively addresses the opponent’s claims against the ‘Universal Medicare.’

Issues such as waiting period and subsidized quality are eliminated with the promotion of Medicare payments and not cuts to the hospitals and the professionals across the health care spectrum.

Similar to the social security number assigned to every legal resident, the Medicare expansion with a standard Medicare card for 24/7 access at any medical facility is long overdue in the only industrialized nation restricting the provision.

Medicare is an established system in the United States.

Other federal programs that are operating in conjunction with Medicare are highly beneficial to the segments receiving the government administered health care service.

Programs such as Medicaid, CHIP, VA, COBRA along with Medicare are the salvation for the ailing and the unaffordable groups in the society.

Since these services are available only to specific segments, the vast majority are forced to endure the abusive conditions in the private insurance and health care industry.

Consolidation of the current federal programs into a ‘Single Payer system,’ would not only provide universal coverage in real terms but also contain the astronomical costs incurred by the taxpayers in the exclusively privatized national health care.

The irony in a democracy is, the people are expected to cast their votes to their representatives and they are forbidden from seeking the basic human rights like the national health care for their contributions through exorbitant premiums and tax dollars.

Contrarily, the campaigns funded by the relevant industries ensure they more than recover their investment in each candidacy from the local to the highest office on the land.

Otherwise, democracy is up for sale during the elections.

The largest donation recipient usually emerges the victor, and then onwards,

The campaign financiers control the legislative process, leaving the electorate with the actual power, a mere formality.

Citizens’ consciousness to the democracy abduction is devoid of vigor and often distracted by the corporate owned media and other outlets, ever dedicated to spin the facts into the concocted theory in obeisance to the sponsors.

When politics is governed by profit management, the democracy’s voice is silenced with massive propaganda and shenanigans.

As a result, the truth and the public trust are casualties in the so-called free and fair elections and the governance supposedly pledged to transparency and accountability.

Speaking against injustice by itself declared as injustice and condemned in the highest order.

Again, the condemnation varies with the target’s background.

The health care is a classic example where the public plight is subject to the industry and their representatives’ acknowledgment or the lack thereof evidenced in the health care legislation costing in excess of $35 trillion for the period 2010 – 2019 and,

Yet the estimated 34 million remain uninsured until such time.

In addition, the mandatory insurance purchase from the private sector expected to generate revenue in penalties through default by the 4 million struggling households.

Essentially, the electorate granting power through the ballots is rendered powerless in a democracy defined as the government of the people, by the people and for the people.

Changes do not occur voluntarily.

Throughout history, the grass roots movement has been responsible for the paradigm shift in politics, economic and social environment.

Their activism and relentless support has been instrumental in promoting economic and social justice, particularly political freedom in different parts of the world.

Sometimes human apathy is directly related to ‘individualism.’

Personal experience triggers instant reaction than passive exposure.

Health care bill like the other legislations, severely affects every citizen as a subscriber and a taxpayer.

Complacent to the recent legislation by denouncing the factual presentation is oxymoron, notwithstanding narcissism.

Standing with the power is an easier option and commonly displayed in the absence of courage.

Failure to amend the health care bill is declining the popular demand for ‘Universal Medicare,’ through Single Payer system –

The honorable and the best health care policy to end the population misery.

Denial eventually leads to cataclysmic outcome and in the health care matter,

It’s a choice between saving life and adhering to the political convention.

Citizens’ need compromised in the health care bill is a travesty and the inaction to reverse the course reveals the Washington reality.

People must come together and share their passion to restore democracy conspicuously lost in the special interests’ dominant legislative affairs, poignantly the health care reform.

Remember, the health care debacle is like the wildfire known for ravaging the entire habitat.

Reluctance to modify the health care legislation to ‘Universal Medicare with 24/7 access’ is an invitation to a colossal political defeat in the midterm elections.

Rationality never betrays at the crossroads of decision-making.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

Health Care Scandal – Apocalyptic Forecast

April 28, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

Despite the candid presentation with facts and figures on the scandalous ‘Health Care reform,’ the issue is evaded with nonsensical representations by sources benefiting from the monumental fraud.

Perhaps, the notion among the authorities is the public have to be content with the policy that is unequivocally detrimental to the citizens interest, regardless of this being a life and death matter and,

Ignore the apocalyptic event arising from it – particularly with respect to,

The cost/value determination showing a significant rise in national deficit at $35 trillion for the period 2010-2019, without the much-acclaimed insurance coverage for the 34 million uninsured.

Details made available in the articles:

Health Care Reform – A National Scam – April 25, 2010.

Health Care Reform – Facts and Flaws – April 23, 2010,

Health Care Legislation Amendment – April 22, 2010 and

Thorough analysis of the components reveals the legislation is industry favored with the vulnerable population subject to predatory practices, otherwise the status quo extension granting exclusive rights to the private sector with an utter disregard for the public health and national debt.

Rejecting the legislation amendment call is a dangerous precedence in a democracy not to mention the constitutional breach, the latest trend in the abuse of power.

There is more chilling evidence that beckons unanimous action on the national debt.

According to the Washington Post article – April 27, 2010

Panel to meet on skyrocketing U.S. debt

If no action is taken, forecasters see fiscal crisis by decade’s end

By Lori Montgomery, Washington Post – Thank you.

Washington – A presidential commission will convene today at the White House to address what leaders of both parties agree is one of the greatest threats to the country’s economic future:

“The rising national debt.”

Official forecasts suggest that without sharp changes in federal spending or tax collections, the United States could enter into a downward spiral of indebtedness that by the end of this decade would erode the country’s ability to educate its children, care for the elderly or mount a robust national defense.

Republicans and Democrats alike say the fiscal challenges have been too long ignored.

But with the two parties feuding over health care reform, Wall Street regulation and a host of other issues – and the economy still uncertain after a deep recession – there is considerable doubt that they could join hands to fend off a still distant potential crisis.

“It would take a miracle,” agreed Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin, D-Ill.

But “I believe in miracles.”

Durbin is the highest-ranking lawmaker among a dozen members of Congress on the commission, which also includes six presidential appointees.

The panel has until Dec. 1 to devise a plan to stop a federal borrowing binge that exploded during the recent recession and will only get worse as retiring baby boomers tap into federal retirement programs.

The gulf between the two parties is vast.

No budget commission has managed to spur action since 1983.

And a host of interest groups is lining up to rally the public against any solution that involves higher taxes or cuts to favored programs – particularly Social Security, which members of both parties consider the ripest target for compromise.

Even supporters of the commission are not optimistic:

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md, a vocal advocate, said the most he expects is,

“A good message with regard to the magnitude of the problem.”

But panel members from both parties say the experience of Greece, deeply in debt and begging other countries to help pay its bills, provides a vivid incentive to set aside ideological differences and work together.

“After stopping a terrorist with a weapon of mass destruction, this is the single most important issue we confront as a nation,”

Said Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., a commission member.

That crisis seemed distant until the recession hit, causing tax collections to tank and federal spending to increase as policymakers scrambled to avert an economic collapse.

The public debt is forecast to rise from less than 40 percent of the economy to more than 60 percent by the end of this year, its highest level since 1952.

The debt will hit 90 percent by 2020 under President Obama’s budget, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, a level last seen in the aftermath of World War II.”
————————————————————————————————–

Grim Reality – By Padmini Arhant

It’s clear from the above WP article and the health care legislation costing $35 trillion for the decade 2010 -2019 under the private for profit health care with 34 million uninsured until 2020,

The United States fiscal crisis is a looming national and global financial disaster.

Failure to amend the health care legislation is a kamikaze action on behalf of those in power unwilling to acknowledge the inevitable catastrophe under the guise of health care reform.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce not surprisingly, considers the public option or the Universal Medicare disruptive in their televised forum on April 26, 2010.

Not long ago, their key representative proudly claimed to have influenced the Supreme Court decision in the ‘Citizens united vs. Federal Election Commission.’

With the cosmetic measures in the health care bill, the legislation is essentially a jackpot for the insurance industry due to the mandatory insurance purchase through federal aid and the regulation lapse extending beyond the decade.

Legislations espousing special interests’ agenda is not a revelation.

However, the ‘Hope and Change,’ campaign pledge was meant to transcend the culture in Washington through transparency and accountability, a misnomer at the political helm.

Continuation on this path projects the dismal economic conditions for the United States, similar to Greece forced to rely on external rescue for solvency.

There is an exception to the United States situation.

Unlike Greece, the United States shares the ‘Too big to fail,’ status and the major creditor China would be susceptible to the precipitous fall,

Notwithstanding the clichéd ramifications on the world financial markets.

CBO’s proclamation on the U.S. debt expected to hit 90 percent by 2020 under the current administration’s budget is not merely a national affair but an international calamity, seeking universal attention.

United States borrowings absorbing 90 percent of the national GDP with revenue on the decline and increase in federal spending is unsustainable.

The economic collapse that was averted in 2009 is effectively created through irresponsible legislations viz. the health care bill designed to escalate the national deficit.

National health care legislation was absolutely necessary to save lives starting immediately.

But not to promote the prospects for the flourishing insurance and the health care industry.

Medicare for all citizens with 24/7 access alongside the private insurance for the high end market as elaborated in the article Universal Medicare – Single Payer System, April 8, 2010, on this website is the ideal and the only viable solution to national health care apart from containing the national debt.

Since Medicare is already established, the cost control and the Medicare expansion to all citizens is no longer a request but a requirement.

Why would the authority in Power lead the nation to the ‘Death Valley’ and refuse to provide valid explanation on this bizarre decision that has been made into law?

Citizens’ disapproval and peaceful (non-violent) protest against the industry favored, private for profit health care is the only hope for democracy to survive.

As for those defending the health care bill and defying the burgeoning national debt from it are in denial.

Remaining complacent to the private for profit health care law at $35 trillion dollars in the absence of universal coverage is a huge burden on the baby boomers and the future taxpayers.

Perhaps, the self-realization that their tax dollars are transformed into the industry’s extravagant bonuses in the ‘business as usual’ environment could change their position and prompt them to be part of the solution rather than the problem.

National debt and valuable health care are inter-related and the health care law exacerbates both issues through preference for profit and politics over people.

The citizens action demanding ‘Universal Medicare’ with 24/7 access by health care bill amendment is imperative to protect life and the democratic system.

It’s incumbent upon the administration to do the needful for the nation or step down graciously.

Democracy is alive when the government of the people stands by the people and delivers for the people.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Ethics | 1 Comment 

Health Care Reform – A National Scam

April 25, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The revelations on the Health care legislation published via articles ‘Health Care Legislation Amendment,’ dated April 22, 2010 and ‘Health Care Reform – Facts and Flaws,’ April 23, 2010, based on the facts is a serious national crisis that cannot be slighted for political or personal ideology.

Legislation that is designed to favor the industry with dire consequences for the citizens, desperately relying on immediate relief from the abominable insurance and health care industry abuse have been defrauded under the guise of reform.

A thorough analysis of health care components on this website along with contributions from neutral economic experts, Medicare Office of the Actuary, Congressional Budget Office, Department of Health and Human Services unequivocally confirm the legislations’ serious implications on millions of lives and the national deficit at $35 trillion from 2010 to 2019.

The health care law in 2014, with mandatory insurance purchase from the private for profit health insurance industry, targets the struggling average Americans and the corporations with penalties for failing to enroll in the system.

However, the requirement on the insurance industry to accept patients with pre-existing illnesses has no similar conditions.

The cost-benefit determination for the decade – 2010-2019 and beyond is disproportionately alarming due to the essential national health care service exclusively privatized and exacerbated with compulsory insurance on federal funding via tax credits to middle and low-income families.

Federal funding to the economically disadvantaged population is necessary.

Unfortunately, the funding is also the means to facilitate private insurance purchase at the industry’s discretionary price conveniently subject to market rates and the costs burden related to health plan taxes, fees etc., factored in as the government’s revenue ultimately transferred back to the federal source through aid recipients and taxpayers.

The report found that “the overhaul will increase national health care spending by $311 billion from 2010 – 2019, or nine-tenths of 1 percent.

To put that in perspective, total health care spending during the decade is estimated to surpass $35 trillion.”

In other aspects, the Medicare cuts are lethal to the seniors gravely concerned about the health care law with the following review:

“The longer-term viability of the Medicare reductions is doubtful.

Assessment flagged the Medicare cuts to hospitals, nursing homes and other providers as potentially unsustainable.

Further, it projected that reductions in payments to private Medicare Advantage plans would trigger an exodus from the popular program.

Enrollment would plummet by about 50 percent, as the plans reduce extra benefits that they currently offer.”

Instead of providing the Universal Medicare with 24/7 access across the nation, the so-called reform is geared in the reverse direction and clearly aimed at weakening Medicare system that is appreciated by the beneficiaries and the legislators on both sides of the aisle.

Again, the Universal Medicare – Single Payer system is affordable and the only permanent solution to the burgeoning health care crisis and national spending.

The expenditure to exceed $35trillion through private for profit health care leaving millions penalized for possible default on insurance subscription and the 34 million Americans expected to wait until 2020 for coverage is not a reform.

It is a direct assault on the vulnerable and ailing population,

For whom the legislation was initiated.

Those who pretend to be tone deaf reflect callousness on this issue for they think it would not affect them.

Apart from narcissism, the attitude is a potential threat to democracy.

As for some advocating to ignore the call, it reveals their priority in promoting self-interest through cronyism, the catalyst to the broken political system that replaces national interest with special interest needs.

The ramifications on silence in the national issue inevitably impact every citizen regardless of political allegiance.

Even the A-political consumers and taxpayers are not spared in the massive health care scam.

Complicity in the widely acknowledged defective national health care legislation is a dangerous setback for democracy.

Anyone who considers this issue to be isolated ought to be in a parallel universe, for it’s the tip of the iceberg with more legislations of this kind – whether financial, energy, climate bills…replicating the pattern.

Despite the grim facts endangering life and the dismal national deficit forecasts,

The White House response to move ahead on other issues for political expediency is deeply regrettable and demonstrates the lack of respect for the citizens’ well being in the national health care law.

Congress is the republic’s true representatives and,

I extend my support to the lawmakers willing to come forward to amend the health care legislation to conform to the reality and that being:

Universal Medicare for all citizens with 24/7 access – Single Payer System and,

It would be funded within the allocated revenue sources to contain the phenomenal health care spending.

I’m prepared to work with them from the public domain to protect the citizens’ interest.

I guarantee every lawmaker that this unique step on their part would be highly rewarding for them in the midterm elections, seemingly challenging around that time.

If the legislations were proved detrimental to the citizens’ welfare and progress as established in the national health care law and there is reluctance to amend the bill,

Then such act is unconstitutional and regarded as treason.

Health care is a life and death matter.

Existing Medicare expansion for all is the only effective policy to deal with the national coverage and escalating deficit.

Legislators and the Executive branch opposed to this amendment owe legitimate explanation to the American electorate in public.

I hope the lawmakers will be guided by their constitutional oath to serve the nation and safeguard the public interest by amending the bill to “Universal Medicare,” commencing immediately, not in a future date.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

Health Care Reform Facts and Flaws

April 23, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The reason this topic cannot be swept under the rug, is the confirmed negative factors directly affecting the national deficit, the Senior citizens and the ‘average American’ families for whom the reform should be immediately favorable and not otherwise.

Following the blogpost titled “Health Care Legislation Amendment” April 22, 2010 supplemented with New York Times article reporting the ‘Senators fear Insurance Premium hikes’ prompting them to pass federal regulation on health rates,

There is yet another report with more alarming details.

According to Associated Press – April 23, 2010

Report: Health care costs set to climb –

President’s effort to control spending falls short, review finds

By Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar – Thank you.

Washington – President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul law will increase the nation’s health care tab instead of bringing costs down, government economic forecasters concluded Thursday in a sobering assessment of the sweeping legislation.

A report by economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department said the health care remake will achieve Obama’s aim of expanding health insurance – adding 34 million Americans to the coverage rolls.

However, the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president’s twin goal of controlling runaway costs.

It also warned that Medicare cuts may be unrealistic and unsustainable, driving about 15 percent of hospitals into the red and “possibly jeopardizing access” to care for seniors.

The mixed verdict for Obama’s signature issue is the first comprehensive look by neutral experts.

In particular, the warnings about Medicare could become a major political liability for Democratic lawmakers in the midterm elections.

Seniors are more likely to vote than younger people and polls show they are already skeptical of the law.

The report from Medicare’s Office of the Actuary carried a disclaimer saying it does not represent the official position of the Obama administration.

White House officials have repeatedly complained that such analyses have been too pessimistic and lowball the law’s potential to achieve savings.

The report acknowledged that some of the cost-control measures in the bill – Medicare cuts, a tax on high-cost insurance and a commission to seek ongoing Medicare savings – could help reduce the rate of cost increases beyond 2020.

But it held out little hope for progress in the first decade.

“During 2010-2019, however, these effects would be outweighed by the increased costs associated with the expansion of health insurance coverage,” wrote Richard Foster, Medicare’s chief actuary.

“Also, the longer-term viability of the Medicare … reductions is doubtful.”

Foster’s office is responsible for long-range costs estimates.

Republicans said the findings validate their concerns about Obama’s 10-year, nearly $1 trillion plan to remake the nation’s health care system.

“A trillion dollars gets spent, and it’s no surprise – health care costs are going to go up,” said Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., a leading Republican on health care issues.

Camp added that he’s concerned the Medicare cuts will undermine coverage for seniors.

The health care law, passed by a divided Congress after a year of bitter partisan debate, would create new health insurance markets for individuals and small businesses.

Starting in 2014, most Americans would be required to carry health insurance except in cases of financial hardship.

Tax credits would help many middle-class households pay their premiums, and Medicaid would pick up more low-income people.

Insurers would be required to accept all applicants, regardless of their health.

A separate Congressional Budget Office analysis, also released Thursday, estimated that 4 million households would be hit with tax penalties under the law for failing to get insurance.

The U.S. spends $2.5 trillion a year on health care, far more per person than any other developed nation, and for results that aren’t clearly better when compared to more frugal countries.

At the outset of the health care debate last year, Obama held out the hope that by bending the cost curve down, the U.S. could cover all its citizens for about what the nation would spend absent any reforms.

The report found that the president’s law missed the mark, although not by much.

The overhaul will increase national health care spending by $311 billion from 2010-2019, or nine-tenths of 1 percent.

To put that in perspective, total health care spending during the decade is estimated to surpass $35 trillion.

Administration officials argue the increase is a bargain price for guaranteeing coverage to 95 percent of Americans.

The report’s most sober assessments concerned Medicare.

In addition to flagging the cuts to hospitals, nursing homes and other providers as potentially unsustainable, it projected that reductions in payments to private Medicare Advantage plans would trigger an exodus from the popular program.

Enrollment would plummet by about 50 percent, as the plans reduce extra benefits that they currently offer.”
————————————————————————————————–

Cost/Benefit Determination – By Padmini Arhant

As stated earlier in the ‘National Health Care Legislation’ analysis and subsequent articles related to the health care reform on this website,

The contentious factors in the health care bill are:

The effects of law set in 2014 and 2019 for the 34 million Americans to obtain coverage and,

The exclusive “private for profit” health care service in the absence of a formidable challenger such as the ‘Universal Medicare’ program to provide real protection to the victims in the health care crisis,

Federal aid to middle-class and lower income families is an appropriate measure.

Again, this would not happen until 2014.

However, if it’s meant to facilitate the means for the mandatory insurance purchase from a private industry with enormous flexibility in price adjustments reinforced by the penalties against the struggling households and corporations will be a bonanza for the insurance industry.

Per the AP article, the CBO analysis estimated “4 million households would be hit with tax penalties under the law for failing to get insurance.”

The report found that “the overhaul will increase national health care spending by $311 billion from 2010 – 2019, or nine-tenths of 1 percent.

To put that in perspective, total health care spending during the decade is estimated to surpass $35 trillion.”

Most poignantly, the costs and benefits during 2010 -2019 and beyond are entirely at the private insurance and health care industry discretion with the federal funding for the coverage to the unaffordable and uninsured segments.

Insurers would be required to accept all applicants, regardless of their health.

Nevertheless, the requirement for the insurance industry has no consequences.

Unlike the 4 million households and the corporations facing penalties upon the insurance purchase default.

Then the effects on Medicare elaborated in the reports from the Medicare Office of the Actuary and the neutral economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department deserve attention.

‘It warned that the unrealistic and unsustainable Medicare cuts would drive out 15 percent of hospitals into the red and “possibly jeopardizing access” to care for seniors.

During the 2010 – 2019, the increased costs associated with the expansions of health insurance coverage are expected to outweigh the cost-control strategies in the bill – Medicare cuts …

Also, the longer-term viability of the Medicare reductions is doubtful.

Assessment flagged the Medicare cuts to hospitals, nursing homes and other providers as potentially unsustainable.

Further, it projected that reductions in payments to private Medicare Advantage plans would trigger an exodus from the popular program.

Enrollment would plummet by about 50 percent, as the plans reduce extra benefits that they currently offer.”

Clearly these drastic steps against Medicare is designed to serve the private industry forcing subscribers to choose the private plan due to the extreme reduction in benefits and care, which is adequately prevalent in the current system.

Indeed, the devil is in the details.

Despite the overwhelming health care spending for the decade 2010 -2019, estimated to surpass $35 trillion, the private industry reap the extraordinary benefits with the mandatory insurance law including the penalties against the uninsured.

In addition, the average citizens as consumers and taxpayers would be deprived of the desirable health care with the Medicare cuts to the private sector’s advantage.

Health care is a matter of life and death.

Since, the 34 million Americans will be covered in 2020 and not in 2010, the argument that,

‘The deal is a bargain for guaranteeing coverage to 95 percent Americans’ does not bode well,
especially with the population needing urgent medical treatment now and the astronomical national health care costs evaluated to surpass $35 trillion for the decade 2010 – 2019.

Predominantly due to the status quo extension with the private health care management.

There is no doubt that the health care bill on Medicare and the culminating factors are going to be a major political liability in the midterm elections.

The Republican members cannot possibly derive any credit from their abstinence in the health care legislation.

It’s a win-win situation for the industry with,

The Republican members declining support to the “Universal Medicare.”

Thus, becoming the proxy for the private sector.

Case in point – Filibuster threat against the Independent Senator from Vermont – Bernie Sanders’ courageous call for “single payer” system thwarted with undemocratic opposition.

Expressing concern over the Medicare cuts for seniors and at the same time refusing to vote for the Universal Medicare for all citizens by the Republican members confirms political expediency.

The democrats on their part anyhow ended up with the legislation delivering victory to the special interests.

With the political system controlled by the lobbyists, the citizens only hope is to take democratic action by demanding that the health care legislation be amended in people’s favor.

“Universal Medicare” is easily affordable at $35 trillion and Single Payer system efficiently addresses the health care crisis and the rising national deficit.

Any reluctance from the lawmakers to amend the bill to ‘Universal Medicare’ would reflect their priorities.

Now is the time for citizen action to save lives and democracy.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

Health Care Legislation Amendment

April 22, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

As stated earlier in the blogposts – National Health Care legislation – March 29, 2010, Universal Health Care – Single Payer System under ‘Health’ category on April 8, 2010, the certainty regarding premium hikes by the Health insurance industry has prompted the legislators to introduce a bill seeking federal regulation on health rates.

According to “The New York Times”, report dated April 21, 2010

By Robert Pear – Thank you.

Democrats seek federal regulation of health rates

“Senators say they fear insurers will raise premiums.”

Washington – Fearing that health insurance premiums may shoot up in the next few years,

Senate Democrats laid a foundation Tuesday for federal regulation of rates, four weeks after President Barack Obama signed a law intended to rein in soaring health costs.

After a hearing on the issue, the chairman of the Senate health committee, Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said he intended to move this year on legislation that would “provide an important check on unjustified premiums.”

Harkin praised a bill introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif, that would give the secretary of health and human services power to review premiums and block “any rate increase found to be unreasonable.”

Under the bill, the federal government could regulate rates in states where state officials did not have “sufficient authority and capability” to do so.

The White House offered a similar proposal in the weeks leading up to approval of the health care legislation last month.

But it was omitted from the final measure, in part for procedural reasons.

Reviving the proposal Tuesday, Harkin said:

“Rate review authority is needed to protect consumers from insurance companies’ jacking up premium simply because they can.”

Under the new health care law, starting in 2014, most Americans will be required to have insurance.

Insurers will have to offer coverage to all applicants and cannot charge higher premiums because of a person’s medical condition or history.

Michael McRaith, director of the Illinois Department of Insurance, told Congress on Tuesday,

“There is a distinct possibility that less responsible companies will raise rates to price out people who are sick or might become sick between now and 2014.”

McRaith said he and the governor of Illinois, Pat Quinn, a Democrat, “unequivocally support state based insurance regulation” because local officials understand local markets.

He endorsed Feinstein’s bill, saying it would “provide an impetus” for states to regulate premiums if they did not already do so.

Karen Ignani, president of America’s Health Insurance Plans, a trade group for insurers, said Congress should let the new law work before piling on additional requirements.

Ignagni said the law imposed new requirements, taxes and fees on health plans, which could further drive up costs.”
————————————————————————————————–

Amendment Requirements – By Padmini Arhant

It’s obvious from the news article and the cited blogposts that forewarned the inevitable health insurance premium hikes, especially with the mandatory insurance scheduled to commence in 2014.

Again, as indicated in the blogposts titled – ‘National Health Care legislation,’ “Universal Health Care – Single Payer System,” and per NYT article, the health care amendments are related to the most vulnerable patients subject to higher premiums between now and 2014.

The healthy subscribers may not be affected right now.

However, in the absence of foolproof system for the insurance industry to circumvent the health care laws, the majority will be forced to deal with the prolonged status quo, even after 2014.

Private sectors use the ‘unknown’ market rates for it is determined by demand and supply, to evade compliance on ‘reasonable’ price.

With the mandatory insurance purchase in 2014, the demand will exceed supply providing the insurers a huge opportunity in price management.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s bill is to address that aspect of the problem.

If the bill is aimed at premium caps augmented with the health and human services discretionary power to block the ‘unreasonable’ rates – it is thoughtful but not guaranteed to be obliged by the Health Insurance industry.

Further, any federal assurance to regulate rates upon the states’ failure or inability to do so, is also a welcome change.

Nevertheless, the resistance from the President of America’s Health Insurance Plans, Karen Ignani, representing a trade group of insurers to any new requirements is conspicuous.

Notwithstanding, the assertion to transfer the costs burden to the consumer, the ultimate payee in the retail business.

It’s always possible to modify and manage products and services under self-control, but it’s much harder when it’s designed and delivered by others.

Regardless of the requirements and legislations, the industry that is a dominant force in the health care service would not easily compromise on the disproportionate profit margins attained thus far.

That’s why, the solid protection for the ‘unaffordable’ customers and those in need of ‘urgent’ care, the existing Medicare expansion is recommended.

As such, the patients under these categories are being assisted with the federal funding to enable access to the ‘private for profit’ health care.

Therefore, it eliminates the opposition to the ‘Universal Health Care’ funding.

In fact, when the cost/benefit ratio is evaluated, the Single Payer system is approved by the economists, Congressional Budget Office and the non-partisan groups concerned about the consumer rights and the rising national deficit.

The purpose behind the health care legislation was to rein in costs to the ‘average’ American families struggling to cope with the private industry’s vertical premiums that will persist despite the regulations as confirmed by the President of the America’s Health Insurance Plans, Karen Ignani.

Although, the coverage denial on pre-existing conditions exacerbated with the higher premiums is prohibited, the present and the future subscribers i.e. in 2014, have not been informed with the relevant details, particularly on the quality and the maximum medical expenses for their individual health condition.

There is lot of ambivalence that requires clarification.

The information on the health care law made available to the public with Q&A interface is necessary to dispel the myths around the insurance plans and the unmitigated health care expenses.

Public awareness and complete knowledge of the health care law is essential to prepare the customers financially in the exclusive private health care service.

In addition, per the insurance industry stance against the health care law and any requirements, the consumers are challenged with the uphill battle in terms of unlimited health care access and affordable costs.

Unless the ‘Universal Medicare’ is extended to the vast uninsured, the health insurance and the health care industry would continue to maneuver around the health care legislation.

The health care legislation is a preliminary step towards the specific issues like pre-existing conditions.

Since, the actual benefits to the currently insured and uninsured are still dependent upon the ‘private for profit’ health care policy,

Unequivocally, the Universal Medicare for all with 24/7 access, especially to the ‘federal aid’ recipients is the immediate and permanent solution to the emerging and the long-term health care crisis.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Health | Leave a Comment 

Happy 62nd Anniversary to the State of Israel!

April 22, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The State of Israel celebrated its 62nd birth anniversary on April 21, 2010.

It’s a joyous occasion and a great moment in history. Israel is a sovereign state with a democratic system.

The twentieth century holocaust, a horrendous crime against humanity led to the creation of the Israeli state.

Israel is an economic partner and a strategic ally of the United States as well as many nations in Europe and other parts of the world.

Israel’s relationship in the Arab world has been understandably restricted to the regions.

Israel’s cordial relationship with Egypt and Jordan are the result of peace treaty and diplomacy between them for a long time.

Similarly, Israel should forge the peace process by completely freezing the Jewish settlements in West Bank and East Jerusalem and,

Move forward with the negotiations on the two state agreements to help their neighbor, Palestinians secure an independent Palestine.

Israel has a unique opportunity to be the beacon of light in securing freedom and democracy in the Middle East by paving the way for Palestine.

That way Israel would be remembered in history for the peace establishment.

Congratulations! To Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the people of Israel for their accomplishments and contributions towards various progress in Israel and the rest of the world.

Happy 62nd anniversary to the State of Israel.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under International Politics | Leave a Comment 

Facts vs. Fiction

April 20, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

My work in the past two years is mischaracterized and spun around to suit the individuals’ theory.

Yet, the bizarre and false allegations have not been substantiated with evidence in public.

Negative emotions hurt the one’s harboring more than the one’s it’s aimed at.

It reflects fear and insecurity.

Contrary to the assertions, I never received any payment or benefits from anyone who directly and indirectly availed the sincere and honest service thus far.

Pay cut is possible when one is being paid for the job and not in the absence of it.

The criticism is that ‘money’ and not charity or volunteer operation considered in the matter.

I have worked in the past two years having placed my life and family on hold for which I was appreciated by many and ridiculed by those with reservations.

I convey my gratitude for the support and respect the positions of those who disagree.

I’m vilified for presenting the reality that I need to generate an income for survival.

Never mind the fact that I have the same commitments as any other ‘average human beings’ dealing with their family’s financial expenses and future.

Neither the banks have exempted me from the mortgage nor have the utility and essential service providers agreed to free supply.

Mandatory service without pay does not qualify as ‘volunteering.’

The irony is those who expect me and my family to survive on merely air and water, although that is not freely available either, refuse to set an example of their own demand.

While being secure with extraordinary remunerations and reaping financial rewards at every opportunity, depriving others of basic needs to exist is oxymoron if not narcissism.

It is imperative for those seeking such requirements to lead by demonstration prior to imposing their ‘double standard’ values on others.

Unfortunately, the victims are marginalized in the distinction between common rights and privilege.

Volunteering for humanitarian service is noble.

Nevertheless, yielding to undemocratic principles and discriminatory practices is cowardice.

Another matter that is attention worthy and deeply troubling in a democracy,

The constant harassment, death threats, invasion of privacy and propaganda to subvert facts represents an attack against the individual’s civil and constitutional rights, besides confirming the inherent paranoia or xenophobia.

In conclusion, humanity thrives with empathy, respect, love and peace for one another.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Ethics | Leave a Comment 

SEC Lawsuit against Goldman Sachs – Perspective

April 19, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

All the reports on Goldman Sachs from various credible sources confirm the fact that,

There is more to it than meets the eye.

SEC investigation must go underneath the surface.

For Goldman Sachs – it’s analogous to “make a mountain out of molehill.”

When in fact, it’s an erupting volcano that has already claimed many lives and threatening more in the present.

Wikipedia Report – Goldman Sachs Controversies: Thank you.

“Robert Freeman, who was a senior Partner, who was the Head of Risk Arbitrage, and who was a protégé of Robert Rubin, was also convicted of insider trading, for his own account and for the firm’s account.”

Per the above report on “Goldman Sachs’ Controversies,” juxtaposed to NYT article on the Obama administration’s economic team,

The New York Times report – By Jackie Calmes – Published: Monday November 24, 2008 – Thank you.

“The president-elect used the announcement Monday that he was appointing two Rubin protégés, Timothy Geithner as Treasury secretary and Lawrence Summers as senior White House economic adviser, to underscore his determination to step aggressively into a economic leadership vacuum in Washington while also maintaining continuity with the Bush administration before the transition of power Jan. 20.

Obama is expected to soon announce the appointment of another Rubin protégé, Peter Orszag, as White House budget director.

And even the headhunters for Obama have Rubin ties: Michael Froman, who was Rubin’s chief of staff in the Treasury Department and followed him to Citigroup, and James Rubin, Robert Rubin’s son.

Geithner, Summers and Orszag have all been followers of the economic formula that came to be called Rubinomics: balanced budgets, free trade and financial deregulation.

On Wall Street, Rubin is facing questions about his role as director of Citigroup, given the bank’s current troubles, and,

During the weekend held several discussions with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson as a government rescue of Citigroup was organized.”

“What worries me is there is not one person in the senior group who is the outsider to this club.

And that’s particularly ironic, given Barack Obama’s bias toward copying Lincoln’s ‘team of rivals,”‘ said Robert Kuttner, a colleague of Bernstein’s at the liberal Economic Policy Institute who has written a book, “Obama’s Challenge,” on free-spending, pro-regulatory approaches to the economic crisis.

“Where is the diversity of opinion in this economic team?” he said.”
————————————————————————————————–

Perspective – By Padmini Arhant

The establishment’s control of the economic power in the Executive branch is noteworthy.

Whether it was the former Goldman Sachs CEO and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson serving the previous Bush-Cheney administration,

Or,

The Obama administration’s economic team identified as “Robert Rubin’s” protégés,

The trend continues with the economic management by those responsible for the economic crisis.

Is it an irony or the undermining of democracy with “business as usual” concept prevailing in any administration.

Goldman Sachs investigation is just the tip of the iceberg.

Rigorous investigation and appropriate action is warranted to resurrect the financial market and the Wall Street credibility.

Goldman Sachs’ dealings in diverse portfolio and the recent performance beckons scrutiny considering the ramifications experienced in the domestic and international financial markets.

Prime examples are Greece and the U.S.economy.

Several European banks reported to have lost money in the deceptive deal.

SEC cannot be complacent with the preliminary finding.

Therefore, it’s incumbent upon SEC to proceed with further investigations against Goldman Sachs to deliver justice to the victims and protect the system from systemic abuse.

The U.S and the global economy cannot sustain history repeating itself.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Business | Leave a Comment 

SEC Lawsuit against Goldman Sachs

April 18, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

The Securities and Exchange Commission filed lawsuit against Goldman Sachs on the toxic derivatives camouflaged with the internationally renowned investment firm, authenticating the risky mortgage securities sold to trusting investors in the domestic and global financial market.

Goldman Sachs is engaged in Investment Banking, Trading and Principal Investments, and Asset Management and Securities Services.

Needless to state that sub-prime mortgage is synonymous to the ‘speed boat’ designed for a fatal crash due to the deliberate sabotage. Sure enough, it had a negative impact on the financial and housing market that contributed to a precipitous economic decline worldwide.

The savvy designers protected their own investment with ‘insurance’ on the ‘abyss’ through yet another global conglomerate ‘AIG,’ technically partners in the ingenious profit oriented craft.

Why?

Because, the insurance companies grill the ‘regular folks’ when applying for any insurance to minimize risk exposure.

Even the trivial finding in the applicant’s background is used as the grounds for rejection or the cause for high premium – e.g. the health insurance industry.

It’s noteworthy that both Goldman Sachs and AIG were swiftly bailed out with taxpayers’ funds on the “Too Big to fail,” concept.

As a result, the fire starters were salvaged by the taxpayers.

The fire sale was organized for the Treasury to buy the damaged goods at the taxpayers’ expense from the banks on the brink of collapse.

————————————————————————————-

Goldman Sachs reportedly,

Wikipedia.org – Thank you.

“Goldman also received $10 billion preferred stock investment from the U.S. Treasury in October 2008, as part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP).

In June 2009, Goldman Sachs repaid the U.S. Treasury’s TARP investment, with 23% interest (in the form of $318 million in preferred dividend payments and $1.418 billion in warrant redemptions).

New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo questioned Goldman’s decision to pay 1556 employees bonuses of at least $1 million after it received TARP funds in 2008.

In December 2009, Goldman announced their top 30 executives will be paid year-end bonuses in restricted stock, with clawback provisions, that must go unsold for five years.”

It’s essential to emphasize that Goldman Sachs is not new to controversy.

——————————————————————————————-

Source: Wikipedia.org – Thank you.

Controversies

In 1986, David Brown was convicted of passing inside information to Ivan Boesky on a takeover deal.
Robert Freeman, who was a senior Partner, who was the Head of Risk Arbitrage, and,

Who was a protégé of Robert Rubin, was also convicted of insider trading, for his own account and for the firm’s account.

On November 11, 2008, the Los Angeles Times reported that Goldman Sachs, which earned $25M from underwriting California bonds, had advised other clients to “short” those bonds.

Shorting is essentially betting that the state will default on the bonds, which serves to drive up the cost of the issue to the state.

During 2008 Goldman Sachs came under criticism for an apparent revolving-door relationship in which its employees and consultants have moved in and out of high level US Government positions, where there may exist the potential for a conflict of interest.

Former Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson was a former CEO of Goldman Sachs.

Additional controversy attended the selection of former Goldman Sachs lobbyist Mark Patterson as chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Geithner, despite President Barack Obama’s campaign promise that he would limit the influence of lobbyists in his administration.

During 2010, Goldman Sachs has been accused for its involvement in the 2010 European sovereign debt crisis.

Goldman Sachs between the years 1998-2009 has been reported to systematically helped the Greek government to mask its national true debt facts.

In September 2009 though, Goldman Sachs among others, created a special Credit Default Swap (CDS) index for the cover of high risk national debt of Greece.[66] This led the interest-rates of Greek national bonds to a very high level, leading the Greek economy very close to bankruptcy in March 2010.”
———————————————————————————————-

Actions in the 2007–2008 subprime mortgage crisis:

Despite the 2007 subprime mortgage crisis, Goldman was able to profit from the collapse in subprime mortgage bonds in the summer of 2007 by selling subprime mortgage-backed securities short.

Two Goldman traders, Michael Swenson and Josh Birnbaum, are credited with bearing responsibility for the firm’s large profits during America’s sub-prime mortgage crisis.

The pair, who are part of Goldman’s structured products group in New York, made a profit of $4 billion by “betting” on a collapse in the sub-prime market, and shorting mortgage-related securities.

By summer of 2007, they persuaded colleagues to see their point of view and talked around skeptical risk management executives.

The firm initially avoided large subprime writedowns, and achieved a net profit due to significant losses on non-prime securitized loans being offset by gains on short mortgage positions.

Its sizable profits made during the initial subprime mortgage crisis led the New York Times to proclaim that Goldman Sachs is without peer in the world of finances.

The firm’s viability was later called into question as the crisis intensified in September 2008.

Allan Sloane of Forbes, a financial writer of reputation, wrote a referenced article on 15 October 2007, at the time the crisis had begun to unravel.

It appeared on CNN’s website: “So let’s reduce this macro story to human scale.

Meet GSAMP Trust 2006-S3, a $494 million drop in the junk-mortgage bucket, part of the more than half-a-trillion dollars of mortgage-backed securities issued last year.

We found this issue by asking mortgage mavens to pick the worst deal they knew of that had been floated by a top-tier firm – and this one’s pretty bad.

“It was sold by Goldman Sachs (Charts, Fortune 500) – GSAMP originally stood for Goldman Sachs Alternative Mortgage Products but now has become a name itself, like AT&T and 3M.

“This issue, which is backed by ultra-risky second-mortgage loans, contains all the elements that facilitated the housing bubble and bust.

It’s got speculators searching for quick gains in hot housing markets;

It’s got loans that seem to have been made with little or no serious analysis by lenders; and finally,

It’s got Wall Street, which churned out mortgage “product” because buyers wanted it.

As they say on the Street, ‘When the ducks quack, feed them.'”

Weeks of chaos that sent Lehman Brothers into bankruptcy and led to the rushed sale of Merrill Lynch & Co. to Bank of America Corp.

According to a 2009 Brand Asset Valuator survey taken of 17,000 people nationwide, the firm’s reputation suffered in 2008 and 2009, and rival Morgan Stanley was respected more than Goldman Sachs, a reversal of the sentiment in 2006.

Goldman refused to comment on the findings.
—————————————————————————————

2. According to http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/sep2008/paul-s23.shtml – Thank you.

Published by the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI)

Who is Henry Paulson?

By Tom Eley, 23 September 2008

Henry Paulson rose through the ranks of Goldman Sachs, becoming a partner in 1982, co-head of investment banking in 1990, chief operating officer in 1994.

In 1998, he forced out his co-chairman Jon Corzine “in what amounted to a coup,” according to New York Times economics correspondent Floyd Norris, and took over the post of CEO.

Goldman Sachs is perhaps the single best-connected Wall Street firm.

Its executives routinely go in and out of top government posts.

Corzine went on to become US senator from New Jersey and is now the state’s governor.

Corzine’s predecessor, Stephen Friedman, served in the Bush administration as assistant to the president for economic policy and as chairman of the National Economic Council (NEC).

Friedman’s predecessor as Goldman Sachs CEO, Robert Rubin, served as chairman of the NEC and later treasury secretary under Bill Clinton.

Agence France Press, in a 2006 article on Paulson’s appointment,

“Has Goldman Sachs Taken Over the Bush Administration?” noted that, in addition to Paulson,

“[t]he president’s chief of staff, Josh Bolten, and the chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Jeffery Reuben, are Goldman alumni.”

Prior to being selected as treasury secretary, Paulson was a major individual campaign contributor to Republican candidates, giving over $336,000 of his own money between 1998 and 2006.

Since taking office, Paulson has overseen the destruction of three of Goldman Sachs’ rivals.

In March, Paulson helped arrange the fire sale of Bear Stearns to JPMorgan Chase.

Then, a little more than a week ago, he allowed Lehman Brothers to collapse,

While simultaneously organizing the absorption of Merrill Lynch by Bank of America.

This left only Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley as major investment banks,

Both of which were converted on Sunday into bank holding companies, a move that effectively ended the existence of the investment bank as a distinct economic form.

Paulson bears a considerable amount of personal responsibility for the crisis.

Paulson, according to a celebratory 2006 Business Week article entitled –

“Mr. Risk Goes to Washington,” was “one of the key architects of a more daring Wall Street, where securities firms are taking greater and greater chances in their pursuit of profits.”

Under Paulson’s watch, that meant “taking on more debt: $100 billion in long-term debt in 2005, compared with about $20 billion in 1999.

It means placing big bets on all sorts of exotic derivatives and other securities.”

According to the International Herald Tribune,

Paulson “was one of the first Wall Street leaders to recognize how drastically investment banks could enhance their profitability by betting with their own capital instead of acting as mere intermediaries.”

Paulson “stubbornly assert[ed] Goldman’s right to invest in, advise on and finance deals, regardless of potential conflicts.”

Paulson then handsomely benefited from the speculative boom.

This wealth was based on financial manipulation and did nothing to create real value in the economy.
On the contrary, the extraordinary enrichment of individuals like Paulson was the corollary to:

The dismantling of the real economy,

The bankrupting of the government and,

The impoverishment of masses the world over.

Paulson was compensated to the tune of $30 million in 2004 and took home $37 million in 2005.

In his career at Goldman Sachs he built up a personal net worth of over $700 million, according to estimates.
——————————————————————————————–

3. By Jackie Calmes – Published: Monday, November 24, 2008 – Thank you.

Obama’s economic team shows influence of Robert Rubin – with a difference

WASHINGTON — It is testament to the star power of former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin among many Democrats that as Barack Obama fills out his economic team, a virtual Rubin constellation is taking shape.

The president-elect used the announcement Monday that he was appointing two Rubin protégés,

Timothy Geithner as Treasury secretary and Lawrence Summers as senior White House economic adviser,

To underscore his determination to step aggressively into a economic leadership vacuum in Washington while also maintaining continuity with the Bush administration before the transition of power Jan. 20.

Obama is expected to soon announce the appointment of another Rubin protégé, Peter Orszag, as White House budget director.

And even the headhunters for Obama have Rubin ties: Michael Froman, who was Rubin’s chief of staff in the Treasury Department and followed him to Citigroup, and James Rubin, Robert Rubin’s son.

Geithner, Summers and Orszag have all been followers of the economic formula that came to be called Rubinomics: balanced budgets, free trade and financial deregulation.

The combination was credited with fueling the prosperity of the 1990s.

But times have changed since then.

On Wall Street, Rubin is facing questions about his role as director of Citigroup, given the bank’s current troubles, and during the weekend held several discussions with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson as a government rescue of Citigroup was organized.”

“What worries me is there is not one person in the senior group who is the outsider to this club.

And that’s particularly ironic, given Barack Obama’s bias toward copying Lincoln’s ‘team of rivals,”‘ said Robert Kuttner, a colleague of Bernstein’s at the liberal Economic Policy Institute who has written a book, “Obama’s Challenge,” on free-spending, pro-regulatory approaches to the economic crisis.

“Where is the diversity of opinion in this economic team?” he said.
————————————————————————————————–

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under Business | Leave a Comment 

Defining the Humanitarian Responsibility

April 16, 2010

By Padmini Arhant

I wish to define the specific purpose of my presence in the political debate that has caused immense anxiety and unnecessary turmoil in the political circle.

As stated earlier, I’ve been assigned a divine mission that I cannot possibly evade or decline in any format.

I am the protector of humanity. My goal is to help achieve freedom, economic and social equality for all in the world.

The commandment is straightforward and that being – the establishment of peace, progress and prosperity.

I’m not here to serve any particular political entity, party or the organization they might represent.

My political position is ‘Independent’ with the commitment towards public needs.

The primary tasks are:

Protect the people’s interest in the United States and across the globe.

Preserve the environment.

My role is to safeguard the people’s rights in a democracy, defend the truth and deliver justice regardless.

The major responsibility is to prepare the planet for a new era in coherence with the cosmic settings.

In terms of the legislative matter, the members of Congress and the Executive branch will be provided with the legislative content and reform details in public to benefit the people and the nation.

In fact, the practice to be continued since my involvement in politics, except the requests were ignored earlier and instead,

The legislations were prepared by the relevant industry and the Executive branch sponsors to suit their agenda.

I was then approached to rally the mass without any bill details.

As the voice for the weak and the vulnerable, my contribution is to enable people govern the nation rather than the special interests directing the legislation.

It would apply to the domestic and global policy.

Notwithstanding the legislative measures to amend the bills found inadequate or is against national interest.

In addition, it includes the call for investigation of the administrations’ policies responsible for deaths and destruction of lives in the United States and around the world.

If the legislation is flawed and potentially harmful to the citizens’ of the United States in domestic policy and likewise in the foreign policy, it’s incumbent upon the head of the Executive branch as the bill’s signatory and final authority to provide valid reasons for such measures.

Barring the ‘special interest’ dominance in the legislative process and the political campaigns is a priority.

It’s a monumental feat even with the divine intervention.

Therefore, the cooperation of the people, the press and the news media is instrumental to make the government run by the people and for the people.

Another effective democratic action would be to implement the ‘campaign finance reform.’

Public participation is crucial through relentless communication with their local representatives to vote for the fundamental changes in the electoral process.

Those who fail to heed to their constituents’ call would be replaced with the obliging candidates.

Citizens should bring them to public focus and seek a legitimate response for their inaction.

The Supreme Court rule has exacerbated the strong political-corporate partnership that has long undermined democracy.

The communication to the political figures from my end has been via on-line for public view.

Accordingly, I request the political authorities to submit their requirements in public to create the foundation for transparency and accountability.

The legislators on either side of the political factions willing to cast their votes to improve people’s lives, advance national and international cause will be guaranteed support for election or re-election.

Washington is broken. It is common knowledge.

However, when the administration, irrespective of the political party is defiant in their claim on legislations and decisions pushed forward against the will of democracy, it is essential to break the chain link.

The previous administration’s unspeakable crimes are forced to become a distant memory and the trend continues with the incumbent administration, refusing to recognize the public disappointment on the national health care legislation scandal.

Further, it’s deeply disturbing to insist that the people accept the issue as a done deal.

Mortgaging the health and lives of millions of people to a health insurance industry to secure the “Political Power” is regrettable especially with the mandatory insurance purchase introduced in the bill.

Exerting pressure on the dissent to fade away is undemocratic and leads the nation towards a wrong direction.

Constantly repeating that “Health care reform is passed” and time to move ahead by disregarding the voice of democracy – the press, media and the people’s concern is indicative of ‘organizations’ controlled political system.

During the 2008 Presidential campaign, the political slogan was – the nation would experience “More of the same” with the Republican Presidency in power, implying that it would be the continuation of Bush-Cheney legacy.

Having been in office for fifteen months, the Obama administration’s record in dealing with the special interests, wars and foreign policy exemplify the adherence to the predecessor’s principles that was vehemently criticized but not abandoned.

There are legislators in the system willing to transcend the culture in Washington. Some of them have admirably spoken against it and shared their grievance with the public.

When the majority is in contract with the “lobbyists” from the various industries,

Perhaps, the minority feels threatened with the possibility of being swift boated in the Congressional race through negative campaign ads.

Unfortunately, they succumb to the ‘special interests’ subversion or their allies in the political hierarchy.

Here are the problems and the solutions for it.

The political system needs reform due to the inherent ‘special interests’ influence in every legislation.

Remedy: Legislation will be conceptualized and presented for public review on-line.

Public prior approval will be sought with queries addressed diligently for clarity.

Queries may be submitted on the Congressional websites.

The legislation material will be precise to dissuade the opposition from rejecting the bill under the pretext of ‘volume.’

Lawmakers will be given sufficient time to study and evaluate the content.

Their input is to be presented in public via on-line on the new webpage – www.publiclegislation.gov, in extension of the existing Congressional website for the House and the Senate.

Legislators will be encouraged to debate and discuss the issue with their constituents and the media to conform to transparency.

I will work on the people’s side to ensure that the policies and legislations benefit the citizens at home and overseas.

The analysis and review will be published prior to the legislation approval, i.e. after receiving the legislators’ views and their exact position on the issue.

Legislation will have a deadline and the legislators would be required to meet the objectives within the given time frame so that the bills are passed with public consent.

Legislators’ voting record on every bill will be displayed on the Congressional web page.

Lawmakers’ brief comment for voting in favor or against it, would be enormously useful to the public.

Legislation is to begin with the Political reform:

Campaign finance reform restricting the sources – corporations, union, religious institution, foreign organization…except for the U.S. citizens, is to become the law.

Election expenses are to be limited and held accountable to the non-partisan election commission, preferably set up by the Public Policy Institute or an independent group non-affiliated to the private sector.

Any lawmakers receiving special interests funds are to be exposed and challenged with a candidate vowed to the public interest.

The news organizations and the media along with the public could play a major role in the political reform by restricting ‘special interests’ access in national legislation.

Health care legislation is to be amended with the guidelines detailed in the article “Universal Health Care.”

I look forward to working with the members of Congress, the news media and the public in reaching the political milestones.

We could consolidate our talent and resources as a nation and work in harmony to restore the magnificent image of the United States of America and bring peace to the world.

Thank you.

Padmini Arhant

Written by Padmini Arhant · Filed Under United States | Leave a Comment 

Next Page »