US Healthcare Bill’s $871 Billion Question.
Will this risky experiment be deemed brilliant political gamesmanship or obsession bordering on folly?
By: Freedom-Kai Phillips
They say what does not kill you, makes you stronger. The Democrats are sure hoping that to be true of their recent initiative, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R.3590). Amid widespread scepticism a myriad of potential roadblocks have been strategically overcome, and the Senate has come to a historical point in its pursuit of comprehensive healthcare reform. Yet, optimism aside, judgement must remain reserved until the practical costs – both economic and social – of this monumental piece of legislation are fully considered.
Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., may have inspired LBJ like comparisons for his Senate mastery, but will the healthcare bill deliver real results? (AP Photo/APTN)
With the potential societal impact being so broad, this bill will prove to be a defining moment for not just the ambitious Obama administration, but the country as a whole. However, observers will not chronicle this event with the rosy undertones offered at press conferences, or the financial models put forward on the Senate floor. Nor, should one be deceived simply by the alluring proposition of increased public access to the American healthcare infrastructure. Rather, attention must be concentrated on the ramifications stemming from the fragile alliance forged to pass the bill; and herein lays the conundrum. As the requisite super-majority needed for overcoming the Republican filibuster was assembled by Senate Democrats, a delicate balance was struck to ensure the essential support of two key Senators, Ben Nelson (D-Neb), and Joe Lieberman (Ind-Ct). However, the resulting compromised bill now conflicts with the previously passed House version on the crucial issue of a “public option.” As many pundits are in agreement that the final amalgamated version will leave healthcare covered entirely by private insurers, the $871 billion question is: will this risky experiment be deemed brilliant political gamesmanship or obsession bordering on folly? Continue Reading…
Top 5 Diplomatic and Power Moves in 2009
It was a unique and troubling year in international affairs and global diplomacy. I am fully aware and admit that this list will not be complete, conclusive or correct in everyone’s opinion. I may even be lucky to agree with you on only 1, or perhaps, 2 events. Nevertheless, the intention is to invite your own lists, and suggestions for mine.
2010, or twently-ten, is going to be a rapid and complex period in international history. Twenty-ten does have a nice ring to it.
5) Seeing nuclear power developing in Iran, the rest of the Middle East’s/Persian Gulf’s powers aim for nuclear programs as well. The Middle East states say they only want atomic power. Some probably do. But United States government and private analysts say they believe that the rush of activity is also intended to counter the threat of a nuclear Iran.
4) US continues to grow UAV attacks in Pakistan, hunt and kill Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud. Issue becomes a major public outrage during Secretary Clinton’s visit to Pakistan in October. Reliance on robotic remote-control vehicles grew quickly in US armed forces.
3) Israel launched major offensive into Gaza. before declaring a unilateral ceasefire before the Obama inauguration. Israel said that it was discontinuing its 22-day-old assault on Hamas, saying the objective of disabling Hamas’s military capabilities had been achieved. Peace plan made no, if not backward progress in 2009.
2) Beijing and New Delhi get Nuclear Hotline. 
The leaders of India and China agreed to set one up between New Delhi and Beijing, highlighting concerns that a worsening border dispute could quickly become the first major conflict of the multipolar era.
1) Kim Jong Il says “skrew you, I’ll do whatever I want, bitches,” to the United States. In January 2009, Pyongyang refused to accept terms proposed by the US and decided to wait out the Bush administration, which foolishly took North Korea off its list of state sponsors of terrorism. In April North Korea test-fired a ballistic missile despite widespread international opposition, testing the young Obama Presidency. When the UN Security Council tightened sanctions Kim Jong Il expelled international nuclear inspectors.
On May 25, 2009, North Korea announced that it had successfully conducted its second nuclear test, again the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed a resolution to tighten sanctions.
In August 2009, former President Bill Clinton paid a dramatic 20-hour visit to North Korea, in which he won the freedom of two captured American journalists, opened a diplomatic channel to North Korea’s reclusive government and dined with the North’s ailing leader, Kim Jong-il. The North Korean government, had sentenced the Current TV journalists, Laura Ling and Euna Lee, to 12 years of hard labor for illegally entering North Korean territory. Mr. Clinton apologized to Mr. Kim for their actions, according to the North Korean state media. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton denied that Mr. Clinton had apologized.
Finally, North Korea keeps up its arms trade business. A shipment of arms and apparently sophisticated missiles from North Korea was seized in Thailand, on a tip from American intelligence agencies, as officials try to determine whether the cargo was headed to South Asia or the Middle East.
