Put the Healthcare Ruling Aside and Celebrate the System

It will be more difficult for some than it will be for others, but in the wake of today’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling on health care, all Americans should take a moment to celebrate.

 It should not matter whether you agree or disagree with how the Court ruled. Forget about the details of the law. The process shows the brilliance of our system of government. It is this which makes our country great.

An independent judiciary was able to consider an intensely politically charged issue without feeling the pressure to satisfy a political party.

 We spend an inordinate amount of time griping about perceived corruption and petty gamesmanship in modern politics. Too many of us are consumed with the shrill rhetoric being voiced on this side of the Court’s steps. It is reassuring to know the nine people on the Court can stay above that fray and freely discharge their duty.
### 

Graham Gillette can be reached at grahamgillette@gmail.com 
This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register essay.

The Constitution Lives, but it’s Up to Us to Make it Work

The United States Supreme Court will soon rule on the sweeping 2010 health care law. The challenges to the law are interesting and complex. For the most part, the partisan debate about how the court will/should rule is neither. After hearing the cacophony spewing from the television squawk box, the Internet and what’s left of print media, one might think he can either be for the law in total, or rabidly against it. Translation; you are 100%, indelibly correct and the other guy is profoundly wrong.

Chances are both sides are correct and wrong. More important, here’s hoping Americans are fine with that.

In these days of 140 character tweets, Facebook posts and sound bites made for TV, we often spend more time trying to get liked by those who already agree with us than to provoke thought, or God forbid, challenge ourselves. The debate about health care demonstrates how this rush to boil the intricate down to simple is harmful to productive dialogue.

Even Mary Kramer, the former U.S. ambassador, president of the Iowa Senate, thinker, writer, advocate of civil discourse and self-described moderate Republican, fell into this trap this week. Motivated by good intentions she asked her social media friends a single multiple-choice question; Do you consider the United States Constitution to be (A) a pesky nuisance preventing government from doing what it needs to do, (B) a “living” document to be interpreted as the situation demands, or (C) the foundation that must be considered as the basis for our actions?

I doubt Kramer expected anyone to choose the pesky document option.

Placing quotation marks around “living” in (B) indicates she likely believes the term is something less than legitimate. Further, “as the situation demands” is a rather crude way to describe a belief the framers knew interpretation of the Constitution would continue to change as America evolved. “As the situation demands” fits in a sentence that begins with “it’s OK to let a child to skip his nightly bath.” It is hardly an adequate way to paraphrase a fundamental legal philosophy where members of the Court apply the Constitution’s values to modern circumstances.

It is rather easy to see why only those comfortable with selection (C) responded.

I have to admit Kramer’s informal poll for her friends made me stop and think about this issue. The two of us had a worthwhile exchange as a result. That is worth something, but we need much more than exchanges like this to bring our country together.

It is fair to expect the Supreme Court may rule that all or part of the health care law violates our Constitution. In the wake of the ruling, whatever is, Americans must decide if and how we should address the cost and sometimes devastating consequences of the U.S. health care system.

Fixing this vexing problem will not be possible if most of us choose to wrap ourselves in the warm self-knitted blanket of believing we alone are right.

The solution will come only if we are willing to challenge ourselves, test our beliefs and, most of all, commit to working together for the greater good. We need to stop worrying about who is more right, who will get the credit and what the Founders would do; and worry more about how we will build a better America on the Foundation they laid. Little of this can be done in a Facebook post, talking point, or in less than 140 characters.

### 

Graham Gillette can be reached at grahamgillette@gmail.com 
This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register online essay.

Opportunity Lost – Branstad’s Nursing Home Kerfuffle

Sylvia Piper had an open letter published in the Des Moines Register and other Iowa papers recently.  She submitted it as head of Disability Rights Iowa, a privately run, federally funded advocacy agency.  Among other things, she wrote because of Governor Branstad’s “political choices, people are suffering and dying on a regular basis in Iowa’s nursing homes.”

Hers were harsh words, to say the least, and they upset a few people.  Branstad’s chief of staff, Jeff Boeyink was among them.  Boeyink was so upset he began a self-described “fact-finding” mission the very morning the letter appeared.

If you are hoping Boeyink wanted to get to the bottom of Piper’s accusations – to find out whether her statements were rooted in reality or political fiction – you are going to be sadly mistaken.  A guy in Boeyink’s position in 2011 wastes little time wading into the muck of public policy.  Job one is to protect yourself by silencing the critic.  Even if the claims are flimsy, responding will likely take investigation and that might occasionally reveal actual problems.  Such things are much easier handled without loudmouth detractors looking over your shoulder.  Boeyink did what political operatives do; he went after Disability Rights Iowa’s federal funding.

Lost in nursing home politics, nursing home residents

Boeyink did not succeed (yet) in pulling the group’s funding, but Piper has been fired and the group has disavowed her comments out of fear of backlash from the Governor.  Boeyink earned his pay.  That is if one holds a vastly different view of government service than do I, but I digress.

The morning Piper’s letter ran, Boeyink ripped off an Email to his counterpart in Congressman Tom Latham’s office, James Cartensen.  He sought a phone conference between Cartensen, Branstad’s general counsel and himself to discuss Piper’s group.  Cartensen agreed, but Boeyink’s use of his private email account to contact Cartensen caused Cartensen to suggest they use one number if the call was official and another if it was non-official.  Boeyink said since the topic was the group’s federal funding, he assumed it would be considered official.  That was a good decision by Boeyink.  (I plan to revisit his use of a private Gmail account in a later column.  In the meantime, the entire exchange can be found here.)

Boeyink, Cartensen and one of Cartensen’s colleagues continued to correspond through Boeyink’s Gmail address for two weeks.  They discussed Disability Rights Iowa’s nearly $400,000 annual federal funding, or ‘a good chunk of change’ in Cartensen’s words, and what options Branstad had ‘to move this function elsewhere.’  OK, Branstad should know his options, especially if he considers the advocacy group is not discharging its duties.

The problem?  In the weeks which have followed, in all of the news stories reporting comments made by Branstad’s staff about this, never once has a staffer suggested Disability Rights Iowa was not discharging its duties.  In fact, the Administration has hardly mentioned nursing home care at all during the fracas.

In the first Register news story about Piper’s letter, Governor Branstad’s spokesperson was quoted saying, “Gov. Branstad is proud of the work Rod Roberts (head of the department) has done to correct the mismanagement of the previous director at the Department of Inspections and Appeals.”  He went on to say budget problems had been rectified and inspections were ahead of schedule.  He bashed the previous administration, but said nothing about nursing home conditions.

Unsurprisingly, Democratic operatives took the reigns of the partisan bandwagonyesterday accusing Branstad of decreasing protections for Iowa’s seniors.  Branstad’s spokesman was undeterred.  He called the charges “a typical, baseless political attack from an opposing political party that ignores facts to instead lob up sophomoric and untrue allegations.”  Again saying nothing about what Branstad is doing to protect seniors.

Sylvia Piper lost because she allowed emotion to overshadow what might have been a reasoned argument about what the Governor of Iowa could do to protect Iowa’s nursing home population.

Governor Branstad lost when his staff decided to engage Piper on her turf.  Branstad is covered in the rancid mud of politics.  Had he ignored the incendiary aspects of Piper’s letter and focused on the few specific and quantifiable charges she leveled, Piper’s credibility would have been largely diminished.  Instead, Branstad’s staff ignored the message and went after the messenger.  They look petty.  Worse, the Branstad response gives credence to Piper’s charge the governor’s political agenda is more important to his team than protecting some of Iowa’s must vulnerable citizens.

Iowans lost the most in this sad exchange.

The best way for a governor to to silence his naysayers is to do the job he was elected to do, let his work and decisions define his ability to lead and leave the political mudslinging to those incapable or disinterested in making Iowa the great place candidates talk about on the campaign trail.  Doing otherwise will cause one to look as ‘sophomoric’ as those who let emotion cloud the issue in the first place.

Governor Branstad would be wise to take a good long look at how his administration communicates with the people they serve.  Before doing so, they may want to examine their priorities.

###

Graham Gillette can be reached at grahamgillette@gmail.com

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.

Let the Revolution Begin!

British chef and media sensation Jamie Oliver has brought his campaign to change the way people eat to the United States. He chose to start his Food Revolution in Huntington, West Virginia, one of the most overweight and unhealthy places in America. Some of the people in Huntington do not appreciate when their city is put in this light, but the truth is they aren’t that much different than any other place in America. At stake is, well, almost everything. I have enlisted to help and I hope you will join us.

Obesity has brought a staggering increase in diabetes, heart disease and countless other health problems. We spend untold millions of dollars on health care costs each year due to our fatness. But, that is just money. Obesity and unhealthy eating habits are exacting an even greater toll on the American family and our nation. A child who exists on chicken nuggets, pizza, French fries and other processed foods is not going to develop properly. He will fall short of his potential and the cold, hard truth is he will live a shorter life. We are the greatest nation on earth and we produce much of the world’s food, but we often eat like college students the morning after an all-night drinking binge. Americans simply are squandering our collective future and greatness, because we eat junk.

Jamie Oliver’s efforts in Huntington have been chronicled in an ABC mini-series Jamie Oliver’s Food Revolution. It airs Fridays at 8:00 p.m. The show is a somewhat frightening and disgusting look at how many Americans eat. Oliver modeled this current effort after a successful campaign he launched in the U.K. a short time ago that resulted in a revamping of that country’s school lunch program and another aimed at how the British eat at home.

Before you write Oliver and the rest of us off as lettuce chomping, boring food nuts, you should know that we stand for something greater. Eating well means enjoying food that tastes as good as it is good for you.

The following is Jamie Oliver’s mission:
“I believe that every child in America has the right to fresh, nutritious school meals, and that every family deserves real, honest, wholesome food. Too many people are being affected by what they eat. It's time for a national revolution. America needs to stand up for better food!

You live in an amazing country full of inspirational people and you have the power to change things. With your help, we can get better food into homes, schools and communities all over America and give your kids a better future.

Sign the petition to save America's cooking skills and improve school food. It could be the most important thing you ever do for your family. America's health needs you now!”

Our local grocery store devotes twenty (20!) frozen food cases to pizza. The chip and cookie aisles are jammed packed with choices. Did you ever notice that all of the processed foods like those exist in the center aisles of your store? My wife and I signed on as ‘revolutionaries’ some time back. We keep mostly to the outer ring of the store these days – the produce section, fresh meats, dairy, etc. can be found there. We avoid foods that come packaged in bags and boxes. Unexpectedly, we have rediscovered the joy of eating.

Will you join us in the outer ring of the store? Our country and your kids are counting on you.

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.

Bipartisan Summit was…Something

Between phone calls and other work, I listened to most of the health care summit yesterday. As a student of and participant in politics for the last 25 years, I have never witnessed anything quite like it. Some have discounted it as political theater. Others are saying it was a waste of time. It was the former, but the meeting cannot be discounted as lacking consequence.

The Republicans in attendance repeated their well practiced two-part refrain. They want the process stopped. They want to start from the beginning.

The Democrats responded with a chorus of we are so close, the country needs to move forward now.

President Obama served as moderator in chief. He talked of finding common ground. He showed an astounding ability to get into the weeds of the complex health care swamp yet stay focused on his agenda. He did not advance the issue with Republicans. If he did anything, he showed Democrats they would have to go this alone. They control the White House and Congress. It’s now or never.

Nobody walked out a winner.

Congressional Republicans could have defined their vision for health care reform. They chose instead to criticize the current bills and the process. With midterm elections looming, the GOP wants to stymie the Democrats. The Republicans made it clear they will use either the lack of action or, should the Democrats pass something, the flaws in the plan to try to win votes. They opted for politics over policy.

Their cynical strategy may work. In the meantime, our ailing, expensive and unfair health care system remains an obstacle in the economy and a heavy weight on the backs of business and American worker. The Republicans offered little to address this. It is possible they don’t think the matter should be addressed at all, but chose to parse their words so as to not say so directly. In any case, they began an election campaign focused on the other party’s failures. It was a disappointing display.

Congressional Democrats tried to follow the President’s lead and sound interested in charting a bipartisan course. I am not sure if they are, but it doesn’t really matter. The only option offered by the Republicans was to start over. The Democrats have expended too much political capital and there is too little time left before Election Day to begin the process anew. They were anything but inspirational.

The President made health care a priority and he relied on his fellow Democrats in Congress to get the job done. They have not. They now appear poised to attempt a comprehensive and complicated overhaul of the system in a single bill.

Yesterday, as I sat listening to the summit participants talk about what the American people want, what the American people need or what the American people expect I sat mulling our 16% health care insurance premium increase. Last year, it was 9%. Unbelievably, I am told these increases fall below the national average.

I heard Republicans talk about the marketplace and the need to allow people to make their own choices. I did not know what they were talking about. Health care insurance does not operate in a truly free market. My choices boil down to limiting our access to doctors, cutting our coverage and rolling the dice that nothing happens to my family’s health this year, or paying the increase by reducing other expenditures at home and in my business. I can’t speak for anybody else, but, for this American, these are scary choices.

I heard Democrats talk about what this massive bill would accomplish. I have seen government at its best and at its worst in my time. As a result, I am confident some of the promises are not going to be kept. I am concerned about what these failures will cost me, my family, my business and my country.

Part of me wants to stand with the Republicans and call for a fresh start. This is such a large problem – let’s make sure we take the time to do this right. Then, I think about yesterday’s meeting and how, even though this issue has been on the burner for decades, no Congress or President has ever mustered the courage to do something of substance about it. The steely faces and the gamesmanship in Blair House yesterday should tell us something. Health care has become politically toxic. Regardless of who controls Congress in the next term, they are likely to continue to kick this down the road for the next group to handle.

President Obama and the Democratic leadership have a choice. They can move forward with the bill they have created, or they can do what those who preceded them have done and walk away. They will pay a political price either way, but there is a chance they will actually do more good than harm by pressing forward. This American hopes they do. The future of my family, my business and my country rests in their hands. The time to deal with the issue of health care is now.

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.

President Delivers on State of the Union

President Obama addressed a relatively subdued chamber tonight. The partisan tension of the last year has clearly taken a toll. But, the man delivering the speech was more the Barack Obama who campaigned in 2008, than the man we saw during most of last year. He talked of changing government and setting a course to the future. He was frank about the painful price Americans have paid for the partisan wrangling in Washington. He appeared willing to step up to the challenge and work with people of all political persuasions. For over an hour, President Obama laid out a vision for the way forward and he likely connected with many of the Americans who stayed tuned for the entire address.

The President challenged his own party to shake off the past. He renewed his attack on budget bills that hide special projects called earmarks. He announced he will begin meeting with Republicans in Congress on a regular basis. Interestingly, he spent few minutes on health care. Most important, President Obama began acting on some of the promises made on cold days in Iowa before the caucuses. Chief among these was a call on Congress to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, allowing gay Americans the honor of serving openly in our Armed Services.

Tonight, Barack Obama was very much a President in charge and with a vision.

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.

Mr. President, I Would Like an Apology

I am very troubled about something that is happening at the White House today. Let me be clear, I do not know whether sinister forces are at work there or not. I am troubled because the doors are locked and the American public is not allowed to listen and observe the discussion going on inside as candidate Obama promised. I know he promised this. I stood in the audience on many cold days during the Iowa Caucus campaign in 2007 and attended events in many of the key battleground states in 2008 when he repeatedly made this pledge. I am disappointed, Mr. President, that you are breaking your passionately delivered assurance that your administration would be transparent during the healthcare discussion.

Watch and listen to this clip from 12/21/2007:



I was there that day. Candidate Obama said the Clintons failed at health care reform because “they went about it the wrong way, they went behind closed doors.” He said he would change the process by allowing Americans the ability to watch and be a part of the process – he said he would “enlist the American people into the conversation.”

President Barack Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) are again meeting behind closed doors at the White House today. The President’s failure to live up to his pledge for transparency is disappointing.

I know that governing in the open is hard. Participants get misquoted and, sometimes, it is difficult for people to say what they really mean when others are listening. But, the alternative is worse. Deals get cut and the public gets shortchanged. The bright lights, cameras and microphones that Mr. Obama promised during the campaign have been unplugged by his Administration.

We will never know what price we Americans have paid for these closed door meetings, because the President has opted to govern as usual instead of abiding to the lofty promises he made on snowy days when he was a candidate to bring change and openess. I know it is silly, but as a person who cheered him that cold day in Washington, Iowa and on countless other days and sites across the country when he said he would open the doors to his White House, I kind of feel he owes me a personal apology.

Many thanks to the Iowa Independent for being there that day and for preserving these comments on their website.

This entry was first published as a Des Moines Register blog entry.