Dear Mr. President,
On my way to work this morning I read a New York Times report on an increase in serious mental illnesses on college campuses and corresponding budget cuts which limit the amount of help students can receive. While my own college experience certainly corroborates this, at least anecdotally, my thoughts went first to a mentally ill man we'd recently caught shoplifting at work. When my coworkers and I stopped him he seemed docile enough (if completely delusional) but once in custody he apparently became quite agitated and made threats against the lives of the arresting officers. A man with a similar illness recently committed a murder in my neighborhood, and so the idea of this shoplifter being released worries me for the safety of those who might cross his path once he's released.
There is an old police superstition about the increase in crime and craziness around the full moon. I've heard it from my parents, from other cops, and from the family of law enforcement. I don't know if I believe this. There is a certain amount of mystery to law enforcement I suppose; there have been times when just looking at a person has told me that they're going to steal. I know my coworkers have experienced this, too. I like to think our brains are perceiving something-the aggressive gait, or the furtive looks- that our conscious minds can't identify. But, absent proof of this, I have to at least consider the possibility that maybe there is some small supernatural aspect to understanding when people are ill-intentioned or dangerous. Maybe the full moon means something. (If so, tonight's lunar eclipse is going to make the whole city nuts.)
I don't think that crazy people can be dismissed as solely a celestial phenomena. Our city (and our state, and our country) need to do more to treat the mentally ill-both to ensure public safety and to help individuals function in society. That this area seems to be the quickest to be cut during budget battles is unsettling. Reading this article about the struggle to keep students in crisis alive, I couldn't help but wonder what could possibly be more important than treating those who pose a risk to themselves or others. As I talk to my peers and appreciate how many of us are frustrated at living life constantly struggling just to get by, I can't help but sympathize with those seriously ill I encounter who aren't even doing that well. Because if it's the economy or stress or the full moon, if it's college kids or homeless schizophrenic shoplifters, we all have an interest in understanding, treating and minimizing the harm of mental illness.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Showing posts with label health care. Show all posts
Showing posts with label health care. Show all posts
Monday, December 20, 2010
Friday, December 17, 2010
Day 351- Celery
| The Daily Show With Jon Stewart | Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c | |||
| Exclusive - Mike Huckabee Extended Interview | ||||
| ||||
Dear Mr. President,
Watching The Daily Show last night, I felt like cheering when Mike Huckabee suggested that Democrats were making health benefits for 9/11 first responders a political battle and Jon Stewart retorted "honestly, to their discredit, they haven't." Stewart goes on to compare the situation to the Democrats being handed a feast of a political win on a silver platter and refusing it in order to sit in a corner and eat celery. His entire show seemed to beg the question "hey, where's your outrage now?" of every 9/11-invoking Republican, FOX news pundit and mosque-protesting bigot. Because honoring those who died on (and continue to die from) 9/11 is about more than keeping Islamic community centers outside of a 10-block radius of ground zero. Mr. Stewart, after the rally to restore sanity, forcefully reminded Rachel Maddow that unlike pundits representing real news networks, he doesn't have any skin in the game, he doesn't play so much as shout drunkenly from the stands. I think yesterday's show demonstrated rather clearly why that isn't always true. It must be frustrating to watch a comedian out-articulate you with a message that Democrats ought to have been owning since the Republican filibuster began.
Another silver platter story arrived in the form of the Republican opposition to the International Protecting Girls by Preventing Child Marriage Act of 2010. House Republicans voted against the bill (even some who co-sponsored it) citing fiscal concerns and bizarre fears that such legislation could increase abortions. I just want to tear my hair out at the horrifying logic being used to justify this. Where is the family-values outrage now?
(See that Cat? See the Cradle? )
I understand the desire to live in merry bipartisan bliss, especially now that every one is in the spirit of the holidays. But Jon Stewart is right. Enough celery! Democrats ought to be finding every TV camera they can and repeating some version of the same line about honoring 9/11's heroes and protecting vulnerable children from exploitation in the name of marriage. The race for 2012 starts any day now (if not yesterday) and voters across the country need to know that voting Republican is tantamount to saying it's OK to let 9/11 first responders suffer and struggle and die, that it's OK to quibble about the global gag rule while 12-year old girls are forced to marry men old enough to be their grandfathers.
Put down the celery Mr. President, it's time for a more satisfying entree.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Friday, November 26, 2010
Day 330-Black Friday & health insurance
Dear Mr. President,
I've worked in retail for the last four years. Most of the time I hated it, but today is the day that usually made me love it. Especially in later years, as a manager, I'd rework my hours for the week and end up spending something ridiculous like 16 or 18 hours at work, setting up before the store opened, drinking way too much coffee, and generally racing around as though lives were at stake. I'm probably just a bit of an adrenaline junkie, but after Black Friday, the store got busier, the lines got longer, and everything just got more exciting as the urgency to build displays, refill displays, organize gift wrapping services, unpack merchandise for the floor and help customers once the doors opened increased. Working retail during the holidays was stressful and did not go well with having a "normal" holiday season, but it was the most fun I've ever had at any job. Today, while I still work in retail, I no longer have the same responsibility toward customers or toward merchandising. It was a little disappointing to roll in at 2 pm for a 6-hour shift catching shoplifters, especially knowing that my sister would be working 18 hours at the clothing store she manages. It's nice not to have lines of frantic bargain hunters surging through the doors at 6 am, but it lacks a certain glamor. (However, the sheer craziness of the shoplifter we caught today pretty much made up for any lack of excitement.)
That being said, in this economy, it was kind of nice to see all of the hilarious coverage of long lines, crazy crowds, and more than a few frantic shoppers who look like they train to find deals all year long. Yes, it still makes me a little sad, and yes, it still makes me wonder if our society has deep issues with priorities and materialism, but I like my job, I like that my friends have jobs, and I hope that many more jobs can be created this Holiday season.
I noticed today that you had to get stitches as a result of a basketball accident. My first reaction was something along the lines of "OH NO, POOR PRESIDENT OBAMA! I SHOULD ASK IF HE"S OK!" (which probably speaks to the near-complete delusion that we're somehow friends which I have developed as a result of all of this letter-writing.) And then I got to thinking about my hand. Yesterday, while cleaning up my thanksgiving dishes, I cut open my hand on a knife hidden in the soapy water. My near-hysterical reaction notwithstanding it really isn't that bad, I'm fine and I didn't bleed to death (or even come all that close) but it still hasn't closed up. Today I showed it to a friend who is also a doctor, and she noted that I should have gone in for stitches. To be perfectly fair, I'm terrified of doctors, hospitals, and generally anything related to blood, bleeding, or medical attention. I probably wouldn't have gone in even if I did have insurance. The fact that I'm uninsured, however, was a significant factor in my decision just to take care of it myself. I'm really glad that you are OK and that you have access to the best healthcare we can offer in this country. But, just for a moment, I couldn't help but step outside myself and realize that if it hadn't been me but my roommates or my sisters or my friends who needed stitches and chose not to get them because they couldn't afford it, I'd be pretty upset knowing that money stood between them and basic care. We've both demonstrated rather clearly that these kind of accidents can happen to any one at any time and that having the option of medical attention makes a big difference (or at least, I'd imagine our respective scars will look fairly different in a few months.)
Anyway, I am glad that you are OK and that your black friday was spent doing something leisurely (at least before elbows were thrown.)
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
I've worked in retail for the last four years. Most of the time I hated it, but today is the day that usually made me love it. Especially in later years, as a manager, I'd rework my hours for the week and end up spending something ridiculous like 16 or 18 hours at work, setting up before the store opened, drinking way too much coffee, and generally racing around as though lives were at stake. I'm probably just a bit of an adrenaline junkie, but after Black Friday, the store got busier, the lines got longer, and everything just got more exciting as the urgency to build displays, refill displays, organize gift wrapping services, unpack merchandise for the floor and help customers once the doors opened increased. Working retail during the holidays was stressful and did not go well with having a "normal" holiday season, but it was the most fun I've ever had at any job. Today, while I still work in retail, I no longer have the same responsibility toward customers or toward merchandising. It was a little disappointing to roll in at 2 pm for a 6-hour shift catching shoplifters, especially knowing that my sister would be working 18 hours at the clothing store she manages. It's nice not to have lines of frantic bargain hunters surging through the doors at 6 am, but it lacks a certain glamor. (However, the sheer craziness of the shoplifter we caught today pretty much made up for any lack of excitement.)
That being said, in this economy, it was kind of nice to see all of the hilarious coverage of long lines, crazy crowds, and more than a few frantic shoppers who look like they train to find deals all year long. Yes, it still makes me a little sad, and yes, it still makes me wonder if our society has deep issues with priorities and materialism, but I like my job, I like that my friends have jobs, and I hope that many more jobs can be created this Holiday season.
I noticed today that you had to get stitches as a result of a basketball accident. My first reaction was something along the lines of "OH NO, POOR PRESIDENT OBAMA! I SHOULD ASK IF HE"S OK!" (which probably speaks to the near-complete delusion that we're somehow friends which I have developed as a result of all of this letter-writing.) And then I got to thinking about my hand. Yesterday, while cleaning up my thanksgiving dishes, I cut open my hand on a knife hidden in the soapy water. My near-hysterical reaction notwithstanding it really isn't that bad, I'm fine and I didn't bleed to death (or even come all that close) but it still hasn't closed up. Today I showed it to a friend who is also a doctor, and she noted that I should have gone in for stitches. To be perfectly fair, I'm terrified of doctors, hospitals, and generally anything related to blood, bleeding, or medical attention. I probably wouldn't have gone in even if I did have insurance. The fact that I'm uninsured, however, was a significant factor in my decision just to take care of it myself. I'm really glad that you are OK and that you have access to the best healthcare we can offer in this country. But, just for a moment, I couldn't help but step outside myself and realize that if it hadn't been me but my roommates or my sisters or my friends who needed stitches and chose not to get them because they couldn't afford it, I'd be pretty upset knowing that money stood between them and basic care. We've both demonstrated rather clearly that these kind of accidents can happen to any one at any time and that having the option of medical attention makes a big difference (or at least, I'd imagine our respective scars will look fairly different in a few months.)
Anyway, I am glad that you are OK and that your black friday was spent doing something leisurely (at least before elbows were thrown.)
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Friday, November 19, 2010
Day 323- In-flight entertainment, death panels and superheroes
Dear Mr. President,
While listening to my favorite song off of the new Kanye West album on continuous loop, I've been surfing internet news stories to find an appropriate topic for today's letter. While a number of stories caught my attention, nothing about them seemed significant enough to become subjects of a letter to the White House. What do you care about Superheroes patrolling the streets of Seattle? Or a couple getting married in the minutes their flight entered Canadian airspace? Or the way budget cuts in Arizona are resulting in low-income patients getting kicked off of lists for organ donations?
These stories so have something in common, and that, I think, is important to you. Or at least it should be. The theme today is about what happens when Government fails. My city government has failed to keep people safe. It's own budget cuts have prevented the manpower and training necessary for proper law enforcement. And so citizens with military and martial arts backgrounds are donning capes and masks, climbing in their KIA and fighting crime for free.
Your administration has failed the gay men aboard that flight, who cannot have their union legally recognized in their own country. You've failed to make this a front and center civil rights issue, to shame the opponents of same-sex marriage for imposing their hateful system of so-called values on the rest of the country. And so two citizens who want to commit to one another for life took to the skies, entered Canadian airspace, and wed.
And when governments fail, sometimes, as demonstrated by (but by no means confined to) the state of Arizona, citizens have no other option but early death. It is a tragic and unacceptable fact that in this country people die all the time from treatable conditions because they are too poor to afford treatment. It is a failure at all levels of government, and, while I should find solace and inspiration in the stories of those taking (criminal and social) justice into their own hands, I can't help but think about the cities cutting police officers (or unable to hire badly needed new ones) who don't have their own roving band of caped crusaders, or the gay couples who can't fly to a place where their marriage will be recognized. And while poverty will always exist, (and will, unfortunately, carry with it a much shorter life expectancy,) while people will always get sick and many will die when they might have been saved, that the wealth that might offset this disparity is concentrated in the richest 1% of our population is a difficult fact to ignore.
The government, as you are so fond of recalling President Lincoln reminding us, should only do for the people what they can not do better for themselves. I think the government is generally better at law enforcement. I think the government could bestow the basic rights same-sex couples deserve. And I think the government can ease the suffering of the poor and uninsured. But so many of us are still waiting for you to step up and show us how it's done.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
While listening to my favorite song off of the new Kanye West album on continuous loop, I've been surfing internet news stories to find an appropriate topic for today's letter. While a number of stories caught my attention, nothing about them seemed significant enough to become subjects of a letter to the White House. What do you care about Superheroes patrolling the streets of Seattle? Or a couple getting married in the minutes their flight entered Canadian airspace? Or the way budget cuts in Arizona are resulting in low-income patients getting kicked off of lists for organ donations?
These stories so have something in common, and that, I think, is important to you. Or at least it should be. The theme today is about what happens when Government fails. My city government has failed to keep people safe. It's own budget cuts have prevented the manpower and training necessary for proper law enforcement. And so citizens with military and martial arts backgrounds are donning capes and masks, climbing in their KIA and fighting crime for free.
Your administration has failed the gay men aboard that flight, who cannot have their union legally recognized in their own country. You've failed to make this a front and center civil rights issue, to shame the opponents of same-sex marriage for imposing their hateful system of so-called values on the rest of the country. And so two citizens who want to commit to one another for life took to the skies, entered Canadian airspace, and wed.
And when governments fail, sometimes, as demonstrated by (but by no means confined to) the state of Arizona, citizens have no other option but early death. It is a tragic and unacceptable fact that in this country people die all the time from treatable conditions because they are too poor to afford treatment. It is a failure at all levels of government, and, while I should find solace and inspiration in the stories of those taking (criminal and social) justice into their own hands, I can't help but think about the cities cutting police officers (or unable to hire badly needed new ones) who don't have their own roving band of caped crusaders, or the gay couples who can't fly to a place where their marriage will be recognized. And while poverty will always exist, (and will, unfortunately, carry with it a much shorter life expectancy,) while people will always get sick and many will die when they might have been saved, that the wealth that might offset this disparity is concentrated in the richest 1% of our population is a difficult fact to ignore.
The government, as you are so fond of recalling President Lincoln reminding us, should only do for the people what they can not do better for themselves. I think the government is generally better at law enforcement. I think the government could bestow the basic rights same-sex couples deserve. And I think the government can ease the suffering of the poor and uninsured. But so many of us are still waiting for you to step up and show us how it's done.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Day 322- HIV/AIDS
Hey all,
Today's letter is inspired by my friend and fellow blogger Joe, who wrote this inspiring (and upsetting) piece for The Body, a site dedicated to HIV/AIDS research, awareness and education.
Also,World AIDS Day is coming up on December 1st, so look for events in your area, or consider donating to a HIV-related cause.
Dear Mr. President,
I'd never met anyone that I knew to be HIV+ before I moved to Boise. My gender studies class required a service component, and I was assigned a volunteer project working with an HIV/AIDS awareness group to organize a World AIDS Day rally. (Specifically, we were asked to coordinate support from the local religious community, an effort that went about as well as you'd imagine in most of the ultra-conservative Idahoan churches.) My classmate and I made phone calls, gave presentations to religious groups, and, on December 1st, stood outside in a park with a local youth group, passing out candles and hot chocolate to a small crowd. We stood together, men and women, young and old, many races, gay, straight, HIV+, HIV-, Christian, Muslim, and Atheist. We listened to the stories of those who had been affected by HIV and we listened to those who confessed their shame at their own ignorance about it. We wore red ribbons. We remembered the dead. We prayed and we cried and we observed in silence.
When I moved to DC, HIV/AIDS was so prevalent and awareness campaigns so widespread that discussion caused considerably less controversy. Perhaps this was because DC is more progressive, or simply because it is more difficult to dismiss a disease as the sole property of an ostracized community when it affects your neighbors, your friends, your family and a staggering number of those you pass on the street every day. That my own life was not directly affected allowed me the luxury of forgetting that attitudes across the country are not so enlightened. That many still think of AIDS as either foreign or self-inflicted. That many still refuse to educate themselves about the stark reality. Years later, when my boyfriend's mother (herself a former nurse) warned her son away from me, claiming my tattooed skin put him at risk for AIDS, I was reminded that this lack of basic understanding was just as widespread in Seattle as it had been in Boise.
Ultimately I am lucky that I've only had one person treat me the way that people with HIV/AIDS are treated all the time. For all of my attempts to laugh off her ignorant remarks, I felt frustrated and angry that she would cite the mere risk of this disease as a reason for her son to stay away from me. But I didn't have to live with that feeling for more than a few days; I didn't have to live with that feeling while also balancing a fear for my own life and the frustration of my own failing health. I can't begin to imagine what that would feel like. Like most Americans, I don't think about it that often.
Today I was reminded by a particularly eloquent essay that many are not so lucky. Especially among GLBTQ youth and communities of color, even the search for a cure can come hand in hand with the worst racist, classist and homophobic practices of our history. HIV/AIDS awareness, education and research is important to all of us, even if its direct effect on our lives isn't obvious.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Today's letter is inspired by my friend and fellow blogger Joe, who wrote this inspiring (and upsetting) piece for The Body, a site dedicated to HIV/AIDS research, awareness and education.
Also,World AIDS Day is coming up on December 1st, so look for events in your area, or consider donating to a HIV-related cause.
Dear Mr. President,
I'd never met anyone that I knew to be HIV+ before I moved to Boise. My gender studies class required a service component, and I was assigned a volunteer project working with an HIV/AIDS awareness group to organize a World AIDS Day rally. (Specifically, we were asked to coordinate support from the local religious community, an effort that went about as well as you'd imagine in most of the ultra-conservative Idahoan churches.) My classmate and I made phone calls, gave presentations to religious groups, and, on December 1st, stood outside in a park with a local youth group, passing out candles and hot chocolate to a small crowd. We stood together, men and women, young and old, many races, gay, straight, HIV+, HIV-, Christian, Muslim, and Atheist. We listened to the stories of those who had been affected by HIV and we listened to those who confessed their shame at their own ignorance about it. We wore red ribbons. We remembered the dead. We prayed and we cried and we observed in silence.
When I moved to DC, HIV/AIDS was so prevalent and awareness campaigns so widespread that discussion caused considerably less controversy. Perhaps this was because DC is more progressive, or simply because it is more difficult to dismiss a disease as the sole property of an ostracized community when it affects your neighbors, your friends, your family and a staggering number of those you pass on the street every day. That my own life was not directly affected allowed me the luxury of forgetting that attitudes across the country are not so enlightened. That many still think of AIDS as either foreign or self-inflicted. That many still refuse to educate themselves about the stark reality. Years later, when my boyfriend's mother (herself a former nurse) warned her son away from me, claiming my tattooed skin put him at risk for AIDS, I was reminded that this lack of basic understanding was just as widespread in Seattle as it had been in Boise.
Ultimately I am lucky that I've only had one person treat me the way that people with HIV/AIDS are treated all the time. For all of my attempts to laugh off her ignorant remarks, I felt frustrated and angry that she would cite the mere risk of this disease as a reason for her son to stay away from me. But I didn't have to live with that feeling for more than a few days; I didn't have to live with that feeling while also balancing a fear for my own life and the frustration of my own failing health. I can't begin to imagine what that would feel like. Like most Americans, I don't think about it that often.
Today I was reminded by a particularly eloquent essay that many are not so lucky. Especially among GLBTQ youth and communities of color, even the search for a cure can come hand in hand with the worst racist, classist and homophobic practices of our history. HIV/AIDS awareness, education and research is important to all of us, even if its direct effect on our lives isn't obvious.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Day 315-Veteran's Day
Dear Mr. President,
Today we honor those who have fought and died for our country. I'm grateful for more than just the excuse to sleep in and miss class. I'm grateful for those who served in the armed forces, for the sacrifices they have made and the service they have done our country. I say all of this as an unapologetic critic of the wars we currently wage, the conduct of some of our troops therein, and of the military's anti-gay policies. I do not believe that my gratitude and my criticism are mutually exclusive.
On the contrary, I believe that the best way to support our troops is to never ask that they put themselves in harms way unless it is absolutely necessary. Unless our survival or our very humanity compels it. That we never put them at risk of torture by torturing our own enemy prisoners. That we never order them to kill in the name of an unjust war. I believe that we support our troops when we insist on allowing openly gay soldiers to serve. When we fully fund rehabilitation programs, health and especially mental health programs, education and employment opportunities for veterans. This is how we walk the walk of those yellow ribbons we wear.
I hope that today you reflect on the wars you inherited and the way they have been waged. On the kill lists, the interrogation methods, the civilian deaths that put our own troops at risk and destroy so many lives (and so many minds) on both sides. On the mistakes made, the mistakes perpetuated and the lies told to cover them up. I hope that you reflect on these things and conclude, as so many of us have, that our troops deserve better.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Today we honor those who have fought and died for our country. I'm grateful for more than just the excuse to sleep in and miss class. I'm grateful for those who served in the armed forces, for the sacrifices they have made and the service they have done our country. I say all of this as an unapologetic critic of the wars we currently wage, the conduct of some of our troops therein, and of the military's anti-gay policies. I do not believe that my gratitude and my criticism are mutually exclusive.
On the contrary, I believe that the best way to support our troops is to never ask that they put themselves in harms way unless it is absolutely necessary. Unless our survival or our very humanity compels it. That we never put them at risk of torture by torturing our own enemy prisoners. That we never order them to kill in the name of an unjust war. I believe that we support our troops when we insist on allowing openly gay soldiers to serve. When we fully fund rehabilitation programs, health and especially mental health programs, education and employment opportunities for veterans. This is how we walk the walk of those yellow ribbons we wear.
I hope that today you reflect on the wars you inherited and the way they have been waged. On the kill lists, the interrogation methods, the civilian deaths that put our own troops at risk and destroy so many lives (and so many minds) on both sides. On the mistakes made, the mistakes perpetuated and the lies told to cover them up. I hope that you reflect on these things and conclude, as so many of us have, that our troops deserve better.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Day 266- 100 days
Update: It turns out due to an error earlier in the year this should actually be called "99 days" oh well. Live and learn, eh?
Dear Mr. President,
The measure of a presidency is often taken by the accomplishments of the first 100 days. I think this is silly. You've got to allow at least a few days to find all the light switches and figure out how to navigate the west wing, right? Not to mention all the the thanking people for their help getting you elected, the waiting for congress to remember that no one in the country knows who they are after election season ends, and, of course, the post-victory poll numbers can't be taken that seriously. But I have 100 days left to write to you this year, and I want to make my last 100 letters count. In 100 days, I want to think that my country will be different. I want to think it will be stronger, economically, and that the Bush-era tax cus will be allowed to expire. I want to think that it will be a freer, and more fair country, where gay and lesbian Americans will be allowed to openly serve in our military and marry whomever they please. I want to think that our image abroad will be improved by the closure of Guantanamo bay, the end of combat in Afghanistan, and that truly fair-minded American leadership in the Palestinian/Israeli peace talks will help create a stable, free and secure Palestinian state. We might also be a greener nation, with an end to harmful agricultural subsidies, a robust new energy policy and heavier federal investment in making our national infrastructure more environmentally friendly. Every single one of these things is possible in 100 days. (I may also wish for socialized health care and higher education, but I recognize those things can't happen in 100 days.) All of this can happen. And while my cynical, realistic side believes that none of these things will be accomplished in so little time, the part of me that still hopes for a better future believes that your next 100 days can be just as important and productive as your first 100 days, or the 100 days that will come after December 31st. And, while I have 100 letters left to write, you can bet that I'm going to bug your more than ever about every single one of these goals.
2010 has been kind of a rough year for you and your presidency. But it's got 100 days left, and that's plenty of time to turn things around and change the way this year and your administration is remembered by history. I hope you make them count.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Dear Mr. President,
The measure of a presidency is often taken by the accomplishments of the first 100 days. I think this is silly. You've got to allow at least a few days to find all the light switches and figure out how to navigate the west wing, right? Not to mention all the the thanking people for their help getting you elected, the waiting for congress to remember that no one in the country knows who they are after election season ends, and, of course, the post-victory poll numbers can't be taken that seriously. But I have 100 days left to write to you this year, and I want to make my last 100 letters count. In 100 days, I want to think that my country will be different. I want to think it will be stronger, economically, and that the Bush-era tax cus will be allowed to expire. I want to think that it will be a freer, and more fair country, where gay and lesbian Americans will be allowed to openly serve in our military and marry whomever they please. I want to think that our image abroad will be improved by the closure of Guantanamo bay, the end of combat in Afghanistan, and that truly fair-minded American leadership in the Palestinian/Israeli peace talks will help create a stable, free and secure Palestinian state. We might also be a greener nation, with an end to harmful agricultural subsidies, a robust new energy policy and heavier federal investment in making our national infrastructure more environmentally friendly. Every single one of these things is possible in 100 days. (I may also wish for socialized health care and higher education, but I recognize those things can't happen in 100 days.) All of this can happen. And while my cynical, realistic side believes that none of these things will be accomplished in so little time, the part of me that still hopes for a better future believes that your next 100 days can be just as important and productive as your first 100 days, or the 100 days that will come after December 31st. And, while I have 100 letters left to write, you can bet that I'm going to bug your more than ever about every single one of these goals.
2010 has been kind of a rough year for you and your presidency. But it's got 100 days left, and that's plenty of time to turn things around and change the way this year and your administration is remembered by history. I hope you make them count.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Day 264- Griping and Groaning
So when I hear Democrats griping and groaning and saying, well, you know, the health care plan didn’t have a public option; and I don’t know, the financial reform -- there was a provision here that I think we should have gotten better; or, you know what, yes, you ended the war in Iraq, the combat mission there, but you haven’t completely finished the Afghan war yet; or this or that or the other -- I say, folks, wake up. This is not some academic exercise. As Joe Biden put it, don’t compare us to the Almighty; compare us to the alternative. That’s what’s at stake in this election.
-President Obama DNC finance dinner 9/21/2010
Dear Mr. President,
I understand that the rich control this country. I understand that donating thousands of dollars to the Democratic Party can buy a person a seat at a table of power or at least a few minutes of your time. So when you go to fundraising dinners and make jokes and give slightly less interesting versions of your stump speech to people wearing single-use clothing that costs as much as I make in a month, I usually don't mind. But when you take an opportunity like this and use it to take a shot at those of us who are struggling just to get by, I have to admit it rubs me the wrong way. "Griping and groaning?" Do you think the people upset about losing the public option are upset because they lost a political game? Because they didn't get their way? A lot of people, even under the new Health Care legislation still can't afford insurance. We still can't afford to get sick, to miss work or to see a doctor for anything short of a true emergency. Is it "griping and groaning" to worry about what happens if I get into an accident or if one my roommates catches strep throat? Or being upset that while you compromise on financial reform, my roommate is told by her small-business owner boss that payday will have to wait a few weeks because business has been too slow? When I read your quote from this dinner, this thirty-thousand-dollar-a-plate dinner, and thought about the way I've been laughing about being rich over a $500 paycheck this week, I felt humiliated.
The tragedy of this recession isn't your low approval numbers or the enthusiasm gap among your supporters. Blaming the left for being disillusioned with your lack of progress isn't going to turn us out at the polls and it isn't going to help you get Democrats to line up in support of your agenda. Your chief of staff might call us whatever names he wants, but without the liberal wing of the Democratic party to fight for things like the public option, you'd be left compromising your tepid centrism to the far right and I don't think that would look much different than President Bush's America. Our griping and groaning is the only reason Congressional Democrats were given the supermajority they spent the last 2 years squandering. I credit your leadership with a number of the accomplishments from congress this year, but why would you berate those of us still hoping to push them to do more?
So while you might mistake our vocal disappointment for griping and groaning, maybe you should step out of the rooms full of people paying more per plate than I take home in a year and remember that all the money from all the rich people in the country can't buy you the support of your base, and it can't give you the satisfaction of actually doing right by the people you got into politics to work for. So while I appreciate your recorded message for OFA volunteers, and your request for more donations from us, I guess I just don't have $30k for dinner and listening to you mock me, my values and the people who share them.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
-President Obama DNC finance dinner 9/21/2010
Dear Mr. President,
I understand that the rich control this country. I understand that donating thousands of dollars to the Democratic Party can buy a person a seat at a table of power or at least a few minutes of your time. So when you go to fundraising dinners and make jokes and give slightly less interesting versions of your stump speech to people wearing single-use clothing that costs as much as I make in a month, I usually don't mind. But when you take an opportunity like this and use it to take a shot at those of us who are struggling just to get by, I have to admit it rubs me the wrong way. "Griping and groaning?" Do you think the people upset about losing the public option are upset because they lost a political game? Because they didn't get their way? A lot of people, even under the new Health Care legislation still can't afford insurance. We still can't afford to get sick, to miss work or to see a doctor for anything short of a true emergency. Is it "griping and groaning" to worry about what happens if I get into an accident or if one my roommates catches strep throat? Or being upset that while you compromise on financial reform, my roommate is told by her small-business owner boss that payday will have to wait a few weeks because business has been too slow? When I read your quote from this dinner, this thirty-thousand-dollar-a-plate dinner, and thought about the way I've been laughing about being rich over a $500 paycheck this week, I felt humiliated.
The tragedy of this recession isn't your low approval numbers or the enthusiasm gap among your supporters. Blaming the left for being disillusioned with your lack of progress isn't going to turn us out at the polls and it isn't going to help you get Democrats to line up in support of your agenda. Your chief of staff might call us whatever names he wants, but without the liberal wing of the Democratic party to fight for things like the public option, you'd be left compromising your tepid centrism to the far right and I don't think that would look much different than President Bush's America. Our griping and groaning is the only reason Congressional Democrats were given the supermajority they spent the last 2 years squandering. I credit your leadership with a number of the accomplishments from congress this year, but why would you berate those of us still hoping to push them to do more?
So while you might mistake our vocal disappointment for griping and groaning, maybe you should step out of the rooms full of people paying more per plate than I take home in a year and remember that all the money from all the rich people in the country can't buy you the support of your base, and it can't give you the satisfaction of actually doing right by the people you got into politics to work for. So while I appreciate your recorded message for OFA volunteers, and your request for more donations from us, I guess I just don't have $30k for dinner and listening to you mock me, my values and the people who share them.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Day 262- Carrot sticks
Dear Mr. President,
Glenn Beck is continuing to hone the skill that made him popular- telling people what they want to hear. Today he has decided to attack the First Lady for the Let's Move campaign, which he inexplicably sees as a threat to his french fries. Beck makes people feel good about their bad choices. Don't let the government tell you what to eat! Don't let them take your freedom fries! He's the ultimate enabler. I have no problem with Beck eating french fries until his arteries turn entirely to trans fat. I'm sure the First Lady doesn't, either. Attempting to combat the undeniable epidemic of obesity and weight-related diseases by improving the way children in this country learn about healthy lifestyle choices is admirable, and exactly no threat to Beck's, or any one's access to french fries. The conversation is uncomfortable; many people probably feel guilty about the choices they make when it comes to food and exercise. I'm sure many of these people would rather be told that they are fine and that no one should be allowed to talk about better choices they could make, as Beck does.
What Beck is doing is pathetic and ultimately perpetuates the problem of complacency, but it is nothing compared to what the government does. Our government has provided $300 billion in federal subsidies of the commodity crops corn and soy, which have made exactly the kind of processed food we should be avoiding cheaper and more accessible than ever. While the First Lady campaigns tirelessly to encourage healthier eating, your federal budget continues to undercut her efforts. All of the positive role models in the sports world can't have half the impact of altering the economic reality that processed, nutritionally bankrupt food-like-substances are cheap and widely available. Poverty is an undeniable factor in this epidemic, as well, and must be addressed in a more comprehensive way before we can expect to see any real improvement.
Taxing soda and snack food is an often-suggested way to reduce consumption. I think that's a great plan, but I know enough junk-food addicts who would fiercely oppose such a tax that I can understand why you might not want to undertake such a step in an election year. Ending subsidies of corn and soy, however, would slowly raise the cost of processing these foods, raising their price (and saving huge amounts of money for taxpayers) without directly taxing consumption.
The First Lady is having a difficult conversation with the country. Telling people that they haven't been doing right by their children is never easy, but it is a truth that must be told. Many will turn to the false comfort of people like Beck who will assure them that their way of life is sacred, untouchable. But unless policies that support the First Lady's efforts are put into place, our health and the health of our planet will continue to suffer the effects of heavily subsidized, cheap, insubstantial calories. This seems like an obvious example of Democrats saying the right thing and being completely unable to back it up with substantial policy changes. Is it any coincidence that the states with the highest obesity and poverty levels also tend to be so-called red states? Maybe it's a stretch, but I think that people generally want to be healthier and more economically stable than they want to be told comforting lies. In the absence of politicians with the courage to offer these things, however, i can see why they'd at least choose the lies that make them feel good over empty promises.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Glenn Beck is continuing to hone the skill that made him popular- telling people what they want to hear. Today he has decided to attack the First Lady for the Let's Move campaign, which he inexplicably sees as a threat to his french fries. Beck makes people feel good about their bad choices. Don't let the government tell you what to eat! Don't let them take your freedom fries! He's the ultimate enabler. I have no problem with Beck eating french fries until his arteries turn entirely to trans fat. I'm sure the First Lady doesn't, either. Attempting to combat the undeniable epidemic of obesity and weight-related diseases by improving the way children in this country learn about healthy lifestyle choices is admirable, and exactly no threat to Beck's, or any one's access to french fries. The conversation is uncomfortable; many people probably feel guilty about the choices they make when it comes to food and exercise. I'm sure many of these people would rather be told that they are fine and that no one should be allowed to talk about better choices they could make, as Beck does.
What Beck is doing is pathetic and ultimately perpetuates the problem of complacency, but it is nothing compared to what the government does. Our government has provided $300 billion in federal subsidies of the commodity crops corn and soy, which have made exactly the kind of processed food we should be avoiding cheaper and more accessible than ever. While the First Lady campaigns tirelessly to encourage healthier eating, your federal budget continues to undercut her efforts. All of the positive role models in the sports world can't have half the impact of altering the economic reality that processed, nutritionally bankrupt food-like-substances are cheap and widely available. Poverty is an undeniable factor in this epidemic, as well, and must be addressed in a more comprehensive way before we can expect to see any real improvement.
Taxing soda and snack food is an often-suggested way to reduce consumption. I think that's a great plan, but I know enough junk-food addicts who would fiercely oppose such a tax that I can understand why you might not want to undertake such a step in an election year. Ending subsidies of corn and soy, however, would slowly raise the cost of processing these foods, raising their price (and saving huge amounts of money for taxpayers) without directly taxing consumption.
The First Lady is having a difficult conversation with the country. Telling people that they haven't been doing right by their children is never easy, but it is a truth that must be told. Many will turn to the false comfort of people like Beck who will assure them that their way of life is sacred, untouchable. But unless policies that support the First Lady's efforts are put into place, our health and the health of our planet will continue to suffer the effects of heavily subsidized, cheap, insubstantial calories. This seems like an obvious example of Democrats saying the right thing and being completely unable to back it up with substantial policy changes. Is it any coincidence that the states with the highest obesity and poverty levels also tend to be so-called red states? Maybe it's a stretch, but I think that people generally want to be healthier and more economically stable than they want to be told comforting lies. In the absence of politicians with the courage to offer these things, however, i can see why they'd at least choose the lies that make them feel good over empty promises.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Day 258- Corn Sugar
Dear Mr. President,
"Corn Sugar" might be my new phrase for anything attempting to improve its image with a benign name. Like Blackwater becoming Xe or torture becoming "enhanced interrogation", the high-fructose corn syrup industry would like to have their product renamed into something slightly more suggestive of sunshine and real food. I'm not really a huge fan of marketing in general, but especially not when it comes to food. The deceptive practices many companies use to encourage consumption are incredibly manipulative. While ultimately we are all responsible for the food choices we make, I don't think companies should make it harder for a consumer to know what, exactly, is in the food they are consuming. That being said, I really don't care what HFCS is called.
HFCS is used primarily in items I don't consume; processed foods, sweetened beverages, and the kinds of candy I didn't even like as a child. I've still never had a Coca Cola, but popular opinion among my well-traveled friends is that Coke tastes better in countries where cane sugar is still used to sweeten it. While one might not have to look very far to see the potential health risks of HFCS consumption, my objection to the substance has nothing to do with it being better or worse for you than sugar. HFCS is popular with the makers of processed food because it is cheap and it is cheap because of the way corn is grown and subsidized in this country. HFCS's real danger is not in its consumption but its environmental, social and economic impacts. When it costs less and is more convenient for me to buy a jar of tomato sauce sweetened with corn than a decent-tasting tomato, well, that's when I get really angry. (Friends can surely attest that I take my tomatoes way too seriously.)
Our nation's health would surely improve if we lowered the amount of sweeteners we consumed overall. Our planet's health would likewise benefit from a complete overhaul in the way we raise our crops. If changing the name from corn syrup to "planet-killing cancer-causing death juice" is the way to accomplish that, well, I'll be the first to start editing the Wikipedia page. I think an informed consumer doesn't need to worry about what a substance is named, so long as they have all the information available to understand the impact their purchase will have on their own health and the health of the planet. What we need more than anything is a national food system that makes healthy food choices the easiest and least expensive options, that encourages sustainable agricultural practices and fair wages for agricultural workers. A food system that places the overall health of our nation above efficiency and profit. Until we change the way we produce and consume food as a society, we're just going to keep getting fatter and sicker while the planet gets hotter and the poor get poorer. Anything else is just corn sugar.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
"Corn Sugar" might be my new phrase for anything attempting to improve its image with a benign name. Like Blackwater becoming Xe or torture becoming "enhanced interrogation", the high-fructose corn syrup industry would like to have their product renamed into something slightly more suggestive of sunshine and real food. I'm not really a huge fan of marketing in general, but especially not when it comes to food. The deceptive practices many companies use to encourage consumption are incredibly manipulative. While ultimately we are all responsible for the food choices we make, I don't think companies should make it harder for a consumer to know what, exactly, is in the food they are consuming. That being said, I really don't care what HFCS is called.
HFCS is used primarily in items I don't consume; processed foods, sweetened beverages, and the kinds of candy I didn't even like as a child. I've still never had a Coca Cola, but popular opinion among my well-traveled friends is that Coke tastes better in countries where cane sugar is still used to sweeten it. While one might not have to look very far to see the potential health risks of HFCS consumption, my objection to the substance has nothing to do with it being better or worse for you than sugar. HFCS is popular with the makers of processed food because it is cheap and it is cheap because of the way corn is grown and subsidized in this country. HFCS's real danger is not in its consumption but its environmental, social and economic impacts. When it costs less and is more convenient for me to buy a jar of tomato sauce sweetened with corn than a decent-tasting tomato, well, that's when I get really angry. (Friends can surely attest that I take my tomatoes way too seriously.)
Our nation's health would surely improve if we lowered the amount of sweeteners we consumed overall. Our planet's health would likewise benefit from a complete overhaul in the way we raise our crops. If changing the name from corn syrup to "planet-killing cancer-causing death juice" is the way to accomplish that, well, I'll be the first to start editing the Wikipedia page. I think an informed consumer doesn't need to worry about what a substance is named, so long as they have all the information available to understand the impact their purchase will have on their own health and the health of the planet. What we need more than anything is a national food system that makes healthy food choices the easiest and least expensive options, that encourages sustainable agricultural practices and fair wages for agricultural workers. A food system that places the overall health of our nation above efficiency and profit. Until we change the way we produce and consume food as a society, we're just going to keep getting fatter and sicker while the planet gets hotter and the poor get poorer. Anything else is just corn sugar.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Friday, September 3, 2010
Day 246- Labor Day
Dear Mr. President,
Thanks for declaring Monday Labor Day. I know you didn't make up the Holiday, and the Presidential Proclamation is almost entirely ceremonial. But thank you. You might think that, as a member of America's workforce, I appreciate the holiday you've proclaimed for us. I guess the part of me that values symbolism and whimsy does, sort of. The rest of me just remembers that this is pushing back payday an extra 24 hours since the payroll department and the bank all have a day off. Don't get me wrong, I don't begrudge my cubicle-bound brethren their 3-day weekend; just because I am a part-time employee and not qualified for a paid holiday doesn't mean every one else shouldn't have a special weekend. My real problem with Labor Day is that it reminds me how truly sad the current state of the American worker actually is.
A study conducted in 2007 found that the US is the only country out of the top 21 richest that does not require by law paid vacation time for workers.
I do understand that if the Federal Government can't secure health insurance for every American worker, paid time off might be a fantastic stretch of the imagination. While I have had jobs with paid vacations, this was a benefit only applicable to select "full-time" employees, even when many designated "part-time" worked as many or more hours. Starbucks is the notable exception to this and I think their entire benefit package for part-time workers is truly one of the most commendable examples from an American company of its size. I think that Starbucks grasps something that more companies might benefit from understanding: employees are often the best customers. Keeping employees healthy and sane and comfortable benefits the employer, and it benefits society as a whole.
Maybe it's just my resentment at not getting a three day weekend. Maybe asking for paid time off is unforgivably socialist of me in a time when you're getting called much worse for doing far less. I am grateful for the victories secured by workers of this country and they are worth remembering. But, in a time when the desperation and fear of so many workers just barely scraping by is exploited to increase the profit margins and bonuses of the rich executives, when so many of us lack health insurance or even paid sick time and are constantly told to just feel lucky we have jobs at all, maybe asking us to celebrate on Monday is asking too much.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Thanks for declaring Monday Labor Day. I know you didn't make up the Holiday, and the Presidential Proclamation is almost entirely ceremonial. But thank you. You might think that, as a member of America's workforce, I appreciate the holiday you've proclaimed for us. I guess the part of me that values symbolism and whimsy does, sort of. The rest of me just remembers that this is pushing back payday an extra 24 hours since the payroll department and the bank all have a day off. Don't get me wrong, I don't begrudge my cubicle-bound brethren their 3-day weekend; just because I am a part-time employee and not qualified for a paid holiday doesn't mean every one else shouldn't have a special weekend. My real problem with Labor Day is that it reminds me how truly sad the current state of the American worker actually is.
A study conducted in 2007 found that the US is the only country out of the top 21 richest that does not require by law paid vacation time for workers.
As a result, 1 in 4 U.S. workers do not receive any paid vacation or paid holidays. The lack of paid vacation and paid holidays in the U.S. is particularly acute for lower-wage and part-time workers, and for employees of small businesses.I'm not an expert or anything, but if we all had paid time off, wouldn't we have more time to stay healthy, recover from illness or injury, connect with our families, raise our children, travel, shop, learn, and be creative? I think most people need more of most of those things in their lives and our society would definitely benefit from more of these activities. Also, if workers were mandated paid time off, more workers would be needed to do the same amount of work and wouldn't that lower unemployment?
I do understand that if the Federal Government can't secure health insurance for every American worker, paid time off might be a fantastic stretch of the imagination. While I have had jobs with paid vacations, this was a benefit only applicable to select "full-time" employees, even when many designated "part-time" worked as many or more hours. Starbucks is the notable exception to this and I think their entire benefit package for part-time workers is truly one of the most commendable examples from an American company of its size. I think that Starbucks grasps something that more companies might benefit from understanding: employees are often the best customers. Keeping employees healthy and sane and comfortable benefits the employer, and it benefits society as a whole.
Maybe it's just my resentment at not getting a three day weekend. Maybe asking for paid time off is unforgivably socialist of me in a time when you're getting called much worse for doing far less. I am grateful for the victories secured by workers of this country and they are worth remembering. But, in a time when the desperation and fear of so many workers just barely scraping by is exploited to increase the profit margins and bonuses of the rich executives, when so many of us lack health insurance or even paid sick time and are constantly told to just feel lucky we have jobs at all, maybe asking us to celebrate on Monday is asking too much.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Day 240- Keeping it in perspective
Dear Mr. President,
Tonight the onset of a minor sore throat has me slightly panicked. It is almost certainly just a cold. I'll drink tea and plenty of fluids and be fine in a few days. The thought that keeps lingering in the back of my mind, however, is about the enormous medical debt my sister once had after a case of strep throat. At the time she was uninsured and it took her over a year to pay off the considerable ER bills. I looked in to what it would cost to be added on to my mother's policy, or to buy my own insurance through my school. Either plan would leave me with a co-pay that I (more than likely) couldn't afford, and the premiums would be more than half of what I pay in rent each month. I know the arguments for having insurance; I want to have insurance. But I also like buying groceries. What I mean to say is I could really go for some socialized medicine right about now.
I seem to be losing some perspective on the actual size of my problems lately. I should be glad that all I have is a sore throat, and that I'm healthy enough to work, and able to go to school. These should be good enough for me, right now. It could be worse, after all, I could be a meat-eater.
Speaking of losing all perspective, it seems that our country has been "wandering in darkness." It was really unlikely that I would find much to agree with Glenn Beck about today, but his religious tones surprised me. All of his talk about returning America to God and restoring our honor just didn't make any sense. Am I, as a secular American, laboring under the false illusion that this country has never had any shortage of religious devotion? Or is Beck, as a Christian, deluded in his idea that America has become too secular? I think the problem is that, so long as our standards for "too religious" or "too secular" are "more religious/secular than me" we will always see ourselves as a persecuted class. Anyway, Beck's speech today seemed harmless enough; if I think that his timing was tasteless and his message off-base, well, that's probably the nicest response I've had to anything he's ever said.
Lately I've been talking to a friend quite a bit about our mutual feeling that we've regressed. Bad habits and old problems seem to be creeping back in to our behavior, while the progress we'd made toward life goals is slipping away. This feeling of falling backwards was beginning to get overwhelming. Regaining my perspective on this, accepting that growth isn't linear or neat or increasing at a predictable rate has helped me calm down and remember that a few bad days don't mean that it's ok to give up. I think I see the whole Tea Party movement as a big regression for our country, back to the mentality that elected and re-elected President Bush. It may be all I can do to comfort myself with the thought that it, too, is a temporary setback, the inevitable ebb of our progress away from those times. A few bad days (or news cycles, or elections) don't mean that it's ok to give up. For now, I'm going to try to sleep away whatever is ailing me and avoid any WebMD-induced panic.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Tonight the onset of a minor sore throat has me slightly panicked. It is almost certainly just a cold. I'll drink tea and plenty of fluids and be fine in a few days. The thought that keeps lingering in the back of my mind, however, is about the enormous medical debt my sister once had after a case of strep throat. At the time she was uninsured and it took her over a year to pay off the considerable ER bills. I looked in to what it would cost to be added on to my mother's policy, or to buy my own insurance through my school. Either plan would leave me with a co-pay that I (more than likely) couldn't afford, and the premiums would be more than half of what I pay in rent each month. I know the arguments for having insurance; I want to have insurance. But I also like buying groceries. What I mean to say is I could really go for some socialized medicine right about now.
I seem to be losing some perspective on the actual size of my problems lately. I should be glad that all I have is a sore throat, and that I'm healthy enough to work, and able to go to school. These should be good enough for me, right now. It could be worse, after all, I could be a meat-eater.
Speaking of losing all perspective, it seems that our country has been "wandering in darkness." It was really unlikely that I would find much to agree with Glenn Beck about today, but his religious tones surprised me. All of his talk about returning America to God and restoring our honor just didn't make any sense. Am I, as a secular American, laboring under the false illusion that this country has never had any shortage of religious devotion? Or is Beck, as a Christian, deluded in his idea that America has become too secular? I think the problem is that, so long as our standards for "too religious" or "too secular" are "more religious/secular than me" we will always see ourselves as a persecuted class. Anyway, Beck's speech today seemed harmless enough; if I think that his timing was tasteless and his message off-base, well, that's probably the nicest response I've had to anything he's ever said.
Lately I've been talking to a friend quite a bit about our mutual feeling that we've regressed. Bad habits and old problems seem to be creeping back in to our behavior, while the progress we'd made toward life goals is slipping away. This feeling of falling backwards was beginning to get overwhelming. Regaining my perspective on this, accepting that growth isn't linear or neat or increasing at a predictable rate has helped me calm down and remember that a few bad days don't mean that it's ok to give up. I think I see the whole Tea Party movement as a big regression for our country, back to the mentality that elected and re-elected President Bush. It may be all I can do to comfort myself with the thought that it, too, is a temporary setback, the inevitable ebb of our progress away from those times. A few bad days (or news cycles, or elections) don't mean that it's ok to give up. For now, I'm going to try to sleep away whatever is ailing me and avoid any WebMD-induced panic.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Monday, July 26, 2010
Day 207- Food deserts, urban farming and earth day
It's earth day monday again! I know, I missed the last two mondays. Not because I forgot about earth day, but because I didn't realize it was monday until thursday or friday. My produce box delivery had to be shut off for last month cause I was poor, so I didn't have that weekly reminder. (Those of you who know me in person will not be at all surprised by this, since I almost never know what day it is.)
Also, please indulge my shameless promotion of a friend's blog, and some local organizations that rock, none of this promotion was solicited. For that matter, any of the links I post, or organizations I encourage readers to donate to, ever sponsor my blog or ask me to link to them. They have no idea that I exist. I just think they're awesome.
Dear Mr. President,
As a part of the Let's Move! campaign, the First Lady has done a commendable job of raising awareness for a number of issues, especially the problems of "food deserts." The distance many have to travel to access fresh, nutritious food has a hugely negative health and environmental impact. Here in Seattle, there are a number of organizations doing really inspiring work to combat this impact.
Every Monday I get a delivery of organic produce from a local company called New Roots Organics. I don't own a car, so getting so many fresh fruits and vegetables delivered is especially convenient. There are a number of local farms that are out of reach for those of us confined to the city, and this service helps farmer and consumer alike. I think the convenience of this service would also appeal to working families, many of whom don't have time or transportation to shop for fresh, local and organic produce. I think that government programs like food stamps should include free or subsidized access to this kind of service, which would help local farmers and help the poorest families have better access to more nutritious food. Companies like New Roots, that provide delivery to food deserts could be more widespread and more affordable if some form of tax incentive were offered.
Urban farming is another important solution. In Seattle we have several urban farm organizations like Alleycat Acres working to increase Seattle's access to fresh produce and appreciation for green spaces in the city. Our city council has lately been discussing changes to the city codes which affect urban agriculture. I have friends who volunteer for alleycat acres, and the work they do is truly inspiring. A federal Race-To-The-Top-style initiative to encourage cities to develop codes and zoning laws that increase and incentivize urban farms and access to them would be a step toward healthier and greener cities. Like Race To The Top, such an initiative could take local innovation and help adapt these solutions to other cities with similar problems.
Regardless of where we live, or what our economic situation is, every one ought to have access to healthy foods; it doesn't take a scientific study to tell us that this will make for a healthier planet and healthier individuals, but, if it did, there are several. I applaud the First Lady's efforts with Let's Move! and I hope that the awareness she's raising will continue to change the way our country thinks about what we eat and where it comes from.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Also, please indulge my shameless promotion of a friend's blog, and some local organizations that rock, none of this promotion was solicited. For that matter, any of the links I post, or organizations I encourage readers to donate to, ever sponsor my blog or ask me to link to them. They have no idea that I exist. I just think they're awesome.
Dear Mr. President,
As a part of the Let's Move! campaign, the First Lady has done a commendable job of raising awareness for a number of issues, especially the problems of "food deserts." The distance many have to travel to access fresh, nutritious food has a hugely negative health and environmental impact. Here in Seattle, there are a number of organizations doing really inspiring work to combat this impact.
Every Monday I get a delivery of organic produce from a local company called New Roots Organics. I don't own a car, so getting so many fresh fruits and vegetables delivered is especially convenient. There are a number of local farms that are out of reach for those of us confined to the city, and this service helps farmer and consumer alike. I think the convenience of this service would also appeal to working families, many of whom don't have time or transportation to shop for fresh, local and organic produce. I think that government programs like food stamps should include free or subsidized access to this kind of service, which would help local farmers and help the poorest families have better access to more nutritious food. Companies like New Roots, that provide delivery to food deserts could be more widespread and more affordable if some form of tax incentive were offered.
Urban farming is another important solution. In Seattle we have several urban farm organizations like Alleycat Acres working to increase Seattle's access to fresh produce and appreciation for green spaces in the city. Our city council has lately been discussing changes to the city codes which affect urban agriculture. I have friends who volunteer for alleycat acres, and the work they do is truly inspiring. A federal Race-To-The-Top-style initiative to encourage cities to develop codes and zoning laws that increase and incentivize urban farms and access to them would be a step toward healthier and greener cities. Like Race To The Top, such an initiative could take local innovation and help adapt these solutions to other cities with similar problems.
Regardless of where we live, or what our economic situation is, every one ought to have access to healthy foods; it doesn't take a scientific study to tell us that this will make for a healthier planet and healthier individuals, but, if it did, there are several. I applaud the First Lady's efforts with Let's Move! and I hope that the awareness she's raising will continue to change the way our country thinks about what we eat and where it comes from.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Monday, July 5, 2010
Day 186- GMO life
Dear Mr. President,
Genetically Modified food certainly sounds unappetizing. On a visceral level I don't like GMO crops; I don't trust the companies that produce them and I don't believe the the effects of consuming them are fully understood. That being said, my sister is a doctor who earned her PHD studying plant genetics and hybrids. She now works for a company that, in the course of its work with impoverished nations, funds the use of these crops to fight starvation and malnourishment. We've often talked about these crops and she's a believer in the benefits that some of them provide.
Still, I'm uneasy. I can't fully explain or quantify my hesitation about GMO crops, except to say that it is directly related to the huge profits enjoyed by Monsanto and other agricultural companies. It isn't that I think organic, non-GMO food is raised or sold without any expectation of profit, it's that there is a certain obscenity to this kind of wealth, in that it makes the few who enjoy it and many more who depend upon it desperate for its preservation. I think Ayn Rand would probably slap me, (or maybe kill me and cut me into small pieces) if she were alive, for equating wealth and immorality, but she was never going to be my biggest fan, anyway. It isn't fair to assume that because a company makes money it is immoral, but when I see the things that the banking and financial companies did to make their huge profits, or the oil companies, I see a pattern of exploitation, manipulation, dishonesty and disregard for safety, social and environmental risks. It appears, to an admittedly casual and ignorant observer, that to achieve such a combination of profit, power and size, a company has to make ethically dubious decisions. At the very least, I doubt that my health, or the planet's, is a higher priority for these companies than their bottom line. Which makes me nervous, considering how blindly our system depends up on them, and the lack of transparency we allow them to operate with.
But I think every one should get to make that decision for themselves. Which is why I hope that, especially in light of the recent Supreme Court decision, the USDA will insist upon clear labeling of all GMO food & products containing GMO ingredients. Allowing consumers to make up their own minds about what they buy and what they eat is essential to our individual freedoms, our obligation to protect ourselves and our planet. This will also make companies like Monsanto more accountable to consumers; allowing the market's invisible hand to keep them just a little more honest. I think that's a solution even Ayn Rand could get behind.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Genetically Modified food certainly sounds unappetizing. On a visceral level I don't like GMO crops; I don't trust the companies that produce them and I don't believe the the effects of consuming them are fully understood. That being said, my sister is a doctor who earned her PHD studying plant genetics and hybrids. She now works for a company that, in the course of its work with impoverished nations, funds the use of these crops to fight starvation and malnourishment. We've often talked about these crops and she's a believer in the benefits that some of them provide.
Still, I'm uneasy. I can't fully explain or quantify my hesitation about GMO crops, except to say that it is directly related to the huge profits enjoyed by Monsanto and other agricultural companies. It isn't that I think organic, non-GMO food is raised or sold without any expectation of profit, it's that there is a certain obscenity to this kind of wealth, in that it makes the few who enjoy it and many more who depend upon it desperate for its preservation. I think Ayn Rand would probably slap me, (or maybe kill me and cut me into small pieces) if she were alive, for equating wealth and immorality, but she was never going to be my biggest fan, anyway. It isn't fair to assume that because a company makes money it is immoral, but when I see the things that the banking and financial companies did to make their huge profits, or the oil companies, I see a pattern of exploitation, manipulation, dishonesty and disregard for safety, social and environmental risks. It appears, to an admittedly casual and ignorant observer, that to achieve such a combination of profit, power and size, a company has to make ethically dubious decisions. At the very least, I doubt that my health, or the planet's, is a higher priority for these companies than their bottom line. Which makes me nervous, considering how blindly our system depends up on them, and the lack of transparency we allow them to operate with.
But I think every one should get to make that decision for themselves. Which is why I hope that, especially in light of the recent Supreme Court decision, the USDA will insist upon clear labeling of all GMO food & products containing GMO ingredients. Allowing consumers to make up their own minds about what they buy and what they eat is essential to our individual freedoms, our obligation to protect ourselves and our planet. This will also make companies like Monsanto more accountable to consumers; allowing the market's invisible hand to keep them just a little more honest. I think that's a solution even Ayn Rand could get behind.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Friday, July 2, 2010
Day 183- All at once
****Update for those of you who don't read my facebook or Chev's: Chev is totally fine and safe, the Peace Corps volunteers are only being evacuated from the Northern regions of Burkina Faso, and so they will be reassigned to southern villages that are safer. Yay for good news!
Dear Mr. President,
I have a soft spot for certain "celebrity" chefs. Jamie Oliver. Molly Wizenberg and, perhaps ironically, given his position on all things vegetarian, Anthony Bourdain. While at work, I glanced through a few passages from Bourdain's latest book, Medium Raw, in which he expresses his inexplicable mix of dislike and respect for Alice Waters. Bourdain, who himself insists upon fresh, organic food for his own family, has several problems with the way Waters has advocated these practices for all Americans. His first problem is with the reality of modern farming, which he, perhaps correctly, insists could not be simultaneously organic, sustainable, and affordable. His next contention, that few Americans want to do the hard work that kind of farming requires and must therefor rely upon immigrant labor or machines to do it for them, reminded me of two articles I'd stumbled upon lately. The first was a Freakonomics piece by James McWilliams on fair trade coffee and economic reality, and the second was an interview with a United Farm Workers of America VP Erik Nicholson discussing agricultural practices, in which Nicholson asserts that the convergence of sustainable small farms, labor and immigration issues make any real progress politically problematic.
Reading these pieces and contemplating the many ways that reality frustrates idealism, I realized that this issue is more than just labor and immigration and sustainability; it's healthcare and our energy future and our environmental policy. What we eat, how we produce our food, will involve and impact every major (and especially contentious) domestic policy issue we face. I was once again reminded of how overwhelmed I felt in Costco the other day, sure that all of my good intentions were for nothing. I don't see how we can possibly remake our entire agricultural system in the image of Waters' utopian ideal, but neither do I have quite so cynical a perspective as Bourdain. We may not have a surplus of Americans willing to return to agricultural labor, at least not the way it is now or has been done in the past, but it isn't as though all Americans are strangers to hard labor. I, for one, (and I doubt very much that I'm alone in this) would much rather have tended fields or picked fruit than toiled away as a food service employee for all the years I spent in unskilled positions. The problem is simultaneous change. We need more people to grow food that is safer and more nutritious, for themselves and for their communities, and to do that we need more people to work in agriculture, and to do that we need to have better wages and working conditions, which means the use of pesticides and factory farming practices would have to change. Immigration, food prices, import and export practices, the environment; everything would be affected. Everything would have to change at once for any of it to work, and I've lived too long to believe that we're capable of that.
So will organic, sustainably grown food continue to be a luxury for the rich, or favorably located, or fervently committed, forever subject to the economic realities that link scaling up these practices with the degradation of the very principles they were founded upon? I want to believe that we can reform ourselves, but I don't know that I, or you, or even Alice Waters, has the solution. In the last few days, I've seen major discussions on healthcare, immigration, energy and environmental policies from the White House, and so I know that your administration still has faith that we can make the necessary changes in all of these areas. For myself, I don't imagine that the solution lies in regressing to the practices that once sustained us; our society has become far too urban, far too disconnected from the land our food comes from to ever fully revert back to the kind of farming I associate with John Steinbeck's novels. I think our best hope is yet to be discovered, but that it will require us all to involve ourselves, however unappealing some may find it, in the sources of our food and to demand better conditions for the people who provide it for us.
Anyway, on Monday I'll be putting myself to the test and see how well my rhetoric stands up against reality. More on that, to come.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Dear Mr. President,
I have a soft spot for certain "celebrity" chefs. Jamie Oliver. Molly Wizenberg and, perhaps ironically, given his position on all things vegetarian, Anthony Bourdain. While at work, I glanced through a few passages from Bourdain's latest book, Medium Raw, in which he expresses his inexplicable mix of dislike and respect for Alice Waters. Bourdain, who himself insists upon fresh, organic food for his own family, has several problems with the way Waters has advocated these practices for all Americans. His first problem is with the reality of modern farming, which he, perhaps correctly, insists could not be simultaneously organic, sustainable, and affordable. His next contention, that few Americans want to do the hard work that kind of farming requires and must therefor rely upon immigrant labor or machines to do it for them, reminded me of two articles I'd stumbled upon lately. The first was a Freakonomics piece by James McWilliams on fair trade coffee and economic reality, and the second was an interview with a United Farm Workers of America VP Erik Nicholson discussing agricultural practices, in which Nicholson asserts that the convergence of sustainable small farms, labor and immigration issues make any real progress politically problematic.
Reading these pieces and contemplating the many ways that reality frustrates idealism, I realized that this issue is more than just labor and immigration and sustainability; it's healthcare and our energy future and our environmental policy. What we eat, how we produce our food, will involve and impact every major (and especially contentious) domestic policy issue we face. I was once again reminded of how overwhelmed I felt in Costco the other day, sure that all of my good intentions were for nothing. I don't see how we can possibly remake our entire agricultural system in the image of Waters' utopian ideal, but neither do I have quite so cynical a perspective as Bourdain. We may not have a surplus of Americans willing to return to agricultural labor, at least not the way it is now or has been done in the past, but it isn't as though all Americans are strangers to hard labor. I, for one, (and I doubt very much that I'm alone in this) would much rather have tended fields or picked fruit than toiled away as a food service employee for all the years I spent in unskilled positions. The problem is simultaneous change. We need more people to grow food that is safer and more nutritious, for themselves and for their communities, and to do that we need more people to work in agriculture, and to do that we need to have better wages and working conditions, which means the use of pesticides and factory farming practices would have to change. Immigration, food prices, import and export practices, the environment; everything would be affected. Everything would have to change at once for any of it to work, and I've lived too long to believe that we're capable of that.
So will organic, sustainably grown food continue to be a luxury for the rich, or favorably located, or fervently committed, forever subject to the economic realities that link scaling up these practices with the degradation of the very principles they were founded upon? I want to believe that we can reform ourselves, but I don't know that I, or you, or even Alice Waters, has the solution. In the last few days, I've seen major discussions on healthcare, immigration, energy and environmental policies from the White House, and so I know that your administration still has faith that we can make the necessary changes in all of these areas. For myself, I don't imagine that the solution lies in regressing to the practices that once sustained us; our society has become far too urban, far too disconnected from the land our food comes from to ever fully revert back to the kind of farming I associate with John Steinbeck's novels. I think our best hope is yet to be discovered, but that it will require us all to involve ourselves, however unappealing some may find it, in the sources of our food and to demand better conditions for the people who provide it for us.
Anyway, on Monday I'll be putting myself to the test and see how well my rhetoric stands up against reality. More on that, to come.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Friday, June 25, 2010
Day 176-Choice as a human right
Dear Mr. President,
Today I read about the impending G8 discussion of global access to abortion services. While the Canadian PM has tacitly made his opposition to this clear, there is hope that the US will come out forcefully in support of safe and legal access to contraception and abortion as a global woman's right. I'm not so hopeful; I think that, for all of your administration's talk about the importance of education and equal rights for women and girls, the health care debate clearly demonstrated that reproductive rights are not enough of a priority to warrant any real political risks. This depressing thought reminded me of a news story I'd read several months back, about a nun in Arizona. Sister Margaret McBride, the administrator of St. Joseph's hospital in Phoenix, approved an abortion for a patient who would have died without terminating her pregnancy. Sister McBride was excommunicated for this, and condemned by many anti-choice organizations.
What struck me about this story is the obvious disdain the church has for the woman's life, and also the contrast in their reaction to this Nun's actions and those of the countless Priests accused of child molestation. This same hypocrisy is apparent in the Helms amendment, and, domestically, the demands that insurance plans covering abortion use no federal funds. Taxpayers fund death and torture and extrajudicial incarceration in Afghanistan every day, but the idea that an organization allowing Afghan women to make their own reproductive decisions would get a dime of American money is too controversial? Surely, if we can declare access to education essential, we can also fight for every woman's right to control her own body, as a woman's health is essential to her participation in society. The US should lead by example, repeal the Helms amendement and campaign strongly for the right to choose for every woman, no matter where she lives. I hope that the G8 will provide an opportunity to demonstrate courageous leadership on this issue, even in the face of controversy.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Today I read about the impending G8 discussion of global access to abortion services. While the Canadian PM has tacitly made his opposition to this clear, there is hope that the US will come out forcefully in support of safe and legal access to contraception and abortion as a global woman's right. I'm not so hopeful; I think that, for all of your administration's talk about the importance of education and equal rights for women and girls, the health care debate clearly demonstrated that reproductive rights are not enough of a priority to warrant any real political risks. This depressing thought reminded me of a news story I'd read several months back, about a nun in Arizona. Sister Margaret McBride, the administrator of St. Joseph's hospital in Phoenix, approved an abortion for a patient who would have died without terminating her pregnancy. Sister McBride was excommunicated for this, and condemned by many anti-choice organizations.
What struck me about this story is the obvious disdain the church has for the woman's life, and also the contrast in their reaction to this Nun's actions and those of the countless Priests accused of child molestation. This same hypocrisy is apparent in the Helms amendment, and, domestically, the demands that insurance plans covering abortion use no federal funds. Taxpayers fund death and torture and extrajudicial incarceration in Afghanistan every day, but the idea that an organization allowing Afghan women to make their own reproductive decisions would get a dime of American money is too controversial? Surely, if we can declare access to education essential, we can also fight for every woman's right to control her own body, as a woman's health is essential to her participation in society. The US should lead by example, repeal the Helms amendement and campaign strongly for the right to choose for every woman, no matter where she lives. I hope that the G8 will provide an opportunity to demonstrate courageous leadership on this issue, even in the face of controversy.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Day 94- For you, Isaac
Dear Mr. President,
Today children around the country are looking for dyed eggs and discovering what the Easter Bunny brought them. According to the AEB, 75 billion eggs are produced in our country each year. Much of these come from huge factory farms, where chickens are given no room to move, no access to fresh air or sunlight, and are often mutilated to facilitate such living conditions. Mr. President, I know there are very few, if any, votes to be had in issues of animal rights. Supporters of animal rights have been railing against the practices of the agricultural industry for decades; and not without good reason. Birds, especially, are not protected by the same humane slaughter statutes that affect Cows and other livestock.
Certainly consumers are empowered to make better choices when it comes to buying animal products; we can often choose to pay more for products that involve less suffering in the production process. Often times, however, we are not given the choice unless we seek it out. 2008's Proposition 2 in California demonstrates that there is considerable political will to change the system entirely; that people want their food to come from animals that aren't mistreated and harmed. The problem with Prop 2 is that, as a state law, it may have more of an effect on where egg production takes place, rather than how. Were similar legislation to be enacted at the national level, moving production out of state wouldn't be an option; American companies would have to adopt humane practices.
I don't know how important it is to you, or to other Americans, for that matter, that the suffering of animals be avoided or minimized, even if the consequences of doing so are inconvenience and higher cost. This can only be done by effectively altering the entire system. We have the power to abuse and mistreat animals all we want; they have little legal protection and no political recourse to address their situation. We can relentlessly pursue lower prices and more efficient systems at the expense of these living creatures that supply our food. We can impose upon them darkness, disease, and disfigurement. However, I think people know better. I think people recognize that there is a link between the health of the animals and the health of those that consume the food they provide or become. I think people recognize that the dignity we accord these weak and unprotected creatures reflects upon our own humanity. I think that small farms will always be important enough to Americans to be worth protecting, as well.
Enacting federal protection for farm animals is an essential step toward ensuring that our agricultural practices are in line with our values and best interests. I hope that your administration will work to ensure that this happens.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Today children around the country are looking for dyed eggs and discovering what the Easter Bunny brought them. According to the AEB, 75 billion eggs are produced in our country each year. Much of these come from huge factory farms, where chickens are given no room to move, no access to fresh air or sunlight, and are often mutilated to facilitate such living conditions. Mr. President, I know there are very few, if any, votes to be had in issues of animal rights. Supporters of animal rights have been railing against the practices of the agricultural industry for decades; and not without good reason. Birds, especially, are not protected by the same humane slaughter statutes that affect Cows and other livestock.
Certainly consumers are empowered to make better choices when it comes to buying animal products; we can often choose to pay more for products that involve less suffering in the production process. Often times, however, we are not given the choice unless we seek it out. 2008's Proposition 2 in California demonstrates that there is considerable political will to change the system entirely; that people want their food to come from animals that aren't mistreated and harmed. The problem with Prop 2 is that, as a state law, it may have more of an effect on where egg production takes place, rather than how. Were similar legislation to be enacted at the national level, moving production out of state wouldn't be an option; American companies would have to adopt humane practices.
I don't know how important it is to you, or to other Americans, for that matter, that the suffering of animals be avoided or minimized, even if the consequences of doing so are inconvenience and higher cost. This can only be done by effectively altering the entire system. We have the power to abuse and mistreat animals all we want; they have little legal protection and no political recourse to address their situation. We can relentlessly pursue lower prices and more efficient systems at the expense of these living creatures that supply our food. We can impose upon them darkness, disease, and disfigurement. However, I think people know better. I think people recognize that there is a link between the health of the animals and the health of those that consume the food they provide or become. I think people recognize that the dignity we accord these weak and unprotected creatures reflects upon our own humanity. I think that small farms will always be important enough to Americans to be worth protecting, as well.
Enacting federal protection for farm animals is an essential step toward ensuring that our agricultural practices are in line with our values and best interests. I hope that your administration will work to ensure that this happens.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Monday, March 29, 2010
Day 88
This is for all of you. Also, for those of you following it, Barbra Boxer's re-election race is heating up, she's polling within the margin of error against both republican front runners, and Carly Fiorina (of demon sheep/ giant blimp ad fame) is leading in the republican primary. If you know California voters, encourage them to get out the vote. The Senate might be funnier with Carly Fiorina in it, but I don't think congress needs any more of her particular brand of crazy.
Dear Mr. President,
The arrests in Michigan of militia members plotting to kill police officers reveals a deeply unsettling movement that seems to be growing. The recent rise in violent anti-government sentiments is frightening, the rhetoric of hate groups across the country, groups who often use religion or nationalism as a disguise echoed in the hysteria of the Tea Party movement and even by some members of the Republican party. This is not to say conservatives are to blame. I grew up in a part of Washington State (a blue state if ever there were) where survivalist militias, cults, and truly horrifying acts of hatred occurred under national leadership from Republicans or Democrats; I recognize that this kind of extremism co-opts the conservative opposition to government and subverts it into violence much in the same way the suicide bombers in Moscow twist their Islamic faith into justification for their crimes.
I don't know what the solution is. My fear-based reaction would be to call for stricter federal regulation of these groups, but I understand that it would only fuel their rhetoric and make all Americans less safe and less free. We cannot protect ourselves by infringing upon the rights of others. The arrest of these extremists in Michigan proves that the current system works; their plans were disrupted by the authorities and lives were saved.
I'm glad that the police were successful in preventing this group from carrying out their plans. My heart is heavy at the loss of life in Russia, as well. I'm sure there are many struggling to make sense of the anger that leads people to this kind of violence, and I have faith that your administration will not take advantage of this struggle to increase its power, as President Bush's did. I sincerely hope that politicians across the political spectrum recognize the power their words have over people, and tone down the rhetoric that is fueling these violent sentiments.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Dear Mr. President,
The arrests in Michigan of militia members plotting to kill police officers reveals a deeply unsettling movement that seems to be growing. The recent rise in violent anti-government sentiments is frightening, the rhetoric of hate groups across the country, groups who often use religion or nationalism as a disguise echoed in the hysteria of the Tea Party movement and even by some members of the Republican party. This is not to say conservatives are to blame. I grew up in a part of Washington State (a blue state if ever there were) where survivalist militias, cults, and truly horrifying acts of hatred occurred under national leadership from Republicans or Democrats; I recognize that this kind of extremism co-opts the conservative opposition to government and subverts it into violence much in the same way the suicide bombers in Moscow twist their Islamic faith into justification for their crimes.
I don't know what the solution is. My fear-based reaction would be to call for stricter federal regulation of these groups, but I understand that it would only fuel their rhetoric and make all Americans less safe and less free. We cannot protect ourselves by infringing upon the rights of others. The arrest of these extremists in Michigan proves that the current system works; their plans were disrupted by the authorities and lives were saved.
I'm glad that the police were successful in preventing this group from carrying out their plans. My heart is heavy at the loss of life in Russia, as well. I'm sure there are many struggling to make sense of the anger that leads people to this kind of violence, and I have faith that your administration will not take advantage of this struggle to increase its power, as President Bush's did. I sincerely hope that politicians across the political spectrum recognize the power their words have over people, and tone down the rhetoric that is fueling these violent sentiments.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Day 84- Rob McKenna does not speak for me
Dear Mr. President,
My state's attorney general is joining the ranks of those filing law suits against the health care reform legislation. I apologize on his behalf. He does not represent me, (or, for that matter, most of the voters in my state,) and if the law suit isn't dropped, I can assure you that Washington State voters will not let him forget it, come 2012.
Today I took a class as part of my training at my new job. We went around the room discussing our reasons for joining the company, and most said that they were doing it for the health insurance. Our company is one of the few that elects to give part-time employees health benefits, but many in my state are not so fortunate. We'll benefit from health care reform in a number of ways, and to have our attorney general join the suit against the legislation is truly disappointing, (not to mention an unconscionable waste of our time & tax dollars.) I hope that Mr. McKenna appreciates just how much this is going to finish his career.
For health care opponents campaigning to repeal the legislation, I share the sentiments you expressed today in Iowa; they want to give insurance companies back the right to deny children with preexisting conditions and raise taxes on small businesses? They should go right ahead. I just can't wait to see the ads coming out of this. I don't think I've ever been so excited for midterm elections. I am not afraid, if other democrats will get out the vote this year, like we did in 2006, we can defend our majority well. Furthermore, we can show those elected officials like Mr. Mckenna why speaking for their constituents is an important part of job security.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
My state's attorney general is joining the ranks of those filing law suits against the health care reform legislation. I apologize on his behalf. He does not represent me, (or, for that matter, most of the voters in my state,) and if the law suit isn't dropped, I can assure you that Washington State voters will not let him forget it, come 2012.
Today I took a class as part of my training at my new job. We went around the room discussing our reasons for joining the company, and most said that they were doing it for the health insurance. Our company is one of the few that elects to give part-time employees health benefits, but many in my state are not so fortunate. We'll benefit from health care reform in a number of ways, and to have our attorney general join the suit against the legislation is truly disappointing, (not to mention an unconscionable waste of our time & tax dollars.) I hope that Mr. McKenna appreciates just how much this is going to finish his career.
For health care opponents campaigning to repeal the legislation, I share the sentiments you expressed today in Iowa; they want to give insurance companies back the right to deny children with preexisting conditions and raise taxes on small businesses? They should go right ahead. I just can't wait to see the ads coming out of this. I don't think I've ever been so excited for midterm elections. I am not afraid, if other democrats will get out the vote this year, like we did in 2006, we can defend our majority well. Furthermore, we can show those elected officials like Mr. Mckenna why speaking for their constituents is an important part of job security.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Monday, March 22, 2010
Day 81
"It is 2010, which means it is way past time for decent Americans to rise up against this kind of garbage, to fight it aggressively wherever it appears. And it is time for every American of good will to hold the Republican Party accountable for its role in tolerating, shielding and encouraging foul, mean-spirited and bigoted behavior in its ranks and among its strongest supporters."
-Bob Herbert, "An Absence of Class" NYT 3/22/2010
Dear Mr. President,
While we savor the victory of the successful passage of health care reform legislation, it is difficult to forget the ignorant, partisan, and, at times, downright hateful rhetoric of those who opposed it. As the media tells and retells the stories of congressman being called "baby killer" or slurred at and spat upon by protesters, and as I hear the misinformation my friends and coworkers are parroting from their conservative information sources, I look around in disbelief. Is this my country? How have so many become so divorced from reality? Members of the United States Congress booed their own President. All of this, the madness of the ads run by the GOP, the racist and borderline treasonous talk of the Tea Party, the complete amnesia with regard to the right's rants about criticizing the President during a time of war under the last administration; it seems endless. Our country is so fractured and I don't see how we can work with the other party when they condone and encourage this kind of behavior. Speaker Pelosi, for all of her faults, made the excellent point on the House floor yesterday about the bill containing 200 republican amendments. How much more bipartisanship is required?I have no problem with dissent, or with the informed, rational arguments against the legislation. I may respect some one even as we have philosophical and ideological differences, but this kind of childish behavior, this refusal to even hear arguments of opposition, it's not dissent, it isn't politics, it's downright absurd.
I will work as hard as I can to ensure that the GOP does not gain a majority in either house this November, but I am afraid for my country if this kind of behavior is rewarded by the voters. I know that political combativeness is not exactly the Democrat's forte, and you may do more to antagonize the right by riding above this behavior rather than stooping to respond to it. Still, it would be gratifying to see some aggressive opposition to the lies being perpetuated, to say nothing of the reprehensible way in which they are attacking Democrats for trying to govern at all.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
-Bob Herbert, "An Absence of Class" NYT 3/22/2010
Dear Mr. President,
While we savor the victory of the successful passage of health care reform legislation, it is difficult to forget the ignorant, partisan, and, at times, downright hateful rhetoric of those who opposed it. As the media tells and retells the stories of congressman being called "baby killer" or slurred at and spat upon by protesters, and as I hear the misinformation my friends and coworkers are parroting from their conservative information sources, I look around in disbelief. Is this my country? How have so many become so divorced from reality? Members of the United States Congress booed their own President. All of this, the madness of the ads run by the GOP, the racist and borderline treasonous talk of the Tea Party, the complete amnesia with regard to the right's rants about criticizing the President during a time of war under the last administration; it seems endless. Our country is so fractured and I don't see how we can work with the other party when they condone and encourage this kind of behavior. Speaker Pelosi, for all of her faults, made the excellent point on the House floor yesterday about the bill containing 200 republican amendments. How much more bipartisanship is required?I have no problem with dissent, or with the informed, rational arguments against the legislation. I may respect some one even as we have philosophical and ideological differences, but this kind of childish behavior, this refusal to even hear arguments of opposition, it's not dissent, it isn't politics, it's downright absurd.
I will work as hard as I can to ensure that the GOP does not gain a majority in either house this November, but I am afraid for my country if this kind of behavior is rewarded by the voters. I know that political combativeness is not exactly the Democrat's forte, and you may do more to antagonize the right by riding above this behavior rather than stooping to respond to it. Still, it would be gratifying to see some aggressive opposition to the lies being perpetuated, to say nothing of the reprehensible way in which they are attacking Democrats for trying to govern at all.
Respectfully yours,
Kelsey
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
