They died in service of their country, as did those who worked to save lives on 9/11. Why shouldn't that be honored as a national day of service, to remember them? (Photo: flickr.com)

Donald Kent Douglas recently contributed an article to Pajamas Media entitled “A ‘National Day of Service?’ Or a Political Hijacking of 9/11?” To say the least, I find his opinions to be overly cynical and I cannot agree with them. But that’s not all. To think that naming 9/11 a National Day of Service somehow dishonors those who lost their lives on that tragic day is backward.

To openly make the claim that President Obama and the Democrats are attempting to “reclaim” the day from Bush Republicans is not only cynical, but indicative of the kind of irrationality that has made reasonable discourse during the health care town halls largely impossible. People need emergency money for coverage, but the extreme right invokes zombies and death books to scare, rather than engaging in back-and-forth discussion. A National Day of Service is an emergency loan to the whole of America.

Obama signed the bill in April

September 11 is now “an annually recognized National Day of Service and Remembrance,” meant to “encourage and facilitate community service across the country.” Douglas, who believes that we live in a shadow reality where the president is actually a Nazi, sites an American Spectator piece by Matthew Vadum to trump up his cause:

The Obama White House is behind a cynical, coldly calculated political effort to erase the meaning of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks from the American psyche and convert Sept. 11 into a day of leftist celebration and statist idolatry.

In short, Vadum and Douglas believe that rather than honoring those who served and died with service for our own for those in need, Obama is “hijacking our generation’s day of infamy, turning it into a ‘socialist holiday of community service.’”

Proof of this?

It’s a single “White House-sponsored teleconference,” in which “the entire array of America-bashing left-wing special interests” attacked 9/11 as a “day of fear.” But Mr. Douglas and Mr. Vadum, that’s exactly what 9/11 is but should not be. Using  9/11 as a constant call to war against terrorism is fear mongering. Service is honorable; fear is paralysis unless it inspires us to act. Soldiers served their country. Those who gave their lives so that others could be saved on 9/11 did the same. Why shouldn’t we honor them with a National Day of Service? Contrary to previous reports, it isn’t mandatory. People can do as their consciences and skills dictate.

He seeks to honor the memories of those who have died, and serving your fellow man as they did is a perfect memorial. What can a clear-thinking person find wrong with that? (Photo: thewhizzer.blogspot.com)

Vadum questions the motives of the National Day of Service because of who may or may not have been involved in a conference call that may or may not have occurred. I don’t care if Ronald McDonald, Mayor McCheese and Benedict Arnold were in on that meeting… if the outcome is service that reminds us of those who have gone before us, that is noble. If that sound like hijacking to you, I advise you to seek help.

Why not GIVE?

The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education (GIVE) Act – HR 1388 – officially passes on the torch of responsibility to current generations. At the very least, this answers former President John F. Kennedy’s call for us to “Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.” Mr. Douglas, to call this “a paramilitary force of volunteer brown shirts” discredits the memory of 9/11 victims in the way you’re accusing Obama of doing. The green community service projects that will come out of GIVE will improve the nation as a whole. Yet you have the gall to say that “undeserved” communities would be served. Considering your seeming obsession with denigrating the “Hip Hop Caucus Advisory Board,” are you trying to show us your racism? If so, you’re succeeding.

The fear mongering is yours

Douglas next references an essay by Columbia history professor Eric Foner. Foner writes, “I’m not sure which is more frightening: the horror that engulfed New York City or the apocalyptic rhetoric emanating daily from the White House.” Then you attempt to confuse readers by invoking the rhetoric of Ward Churchill, who claimed the people in the Twin Towers deserved to die. Last I checked, Ward Churchill does not represent Obama administration policy, nor does it represent popular opinion in any way. A National Day of Service is honorable, a signpost on the way toward a better America. At the very least, it’ll be an outlet to help curb the rampaging obesity rate. All voluntary, of course. Not mandatory. It’s an outlet to do well and be active.

Obama makes reasonable associations, Douglas froths at the mouth

So making the World Trade Center Memorial  ”a high-tech, multimedia tutorial about man’s inhumanity to man, from Native American genocide to the lynchings and cross-burnings of the Jim Crow South, from the Third Reich’s Final Solution to the Soviet gulags and beyond” is in some way inaccurate, Mr. Douglas? Was it not intolerance that led to the tragedy? How is that hijacking the somber remembrance of those who died? If anything, those who died join in the stand against intolerance and hate. It is yet another reminder that America needs something like a National Day of Service. Those who died are honored BY acts of service. It’s not a “Republican” or “Democrat” day; it’s a day that honors the best in humanity – the spirit of service. That is a just cause… there is a poetic justice in what GIVE makes possible. It is emergency money to empower those who want to serve but didn’t have the means to do so before.

Serving the greater good

Douglas ends his screed by labeling the National Day of Service “not a noble national service,” but “a cold, calculating national disgrace.” I’m sorry, sir, but I don’t think you understand what it means to be an American. The right to choose to serve others on a National Day of Service (or any other day, for that matter) is a true sign of humanity. Latching on to the baseless complaint that adding noble action to the memorial of the fallen is political grandstanding is not only misguided, but it is bitter to the point of being unpalatable. However, you do have the right to your opinion, being an American. How do you honor the fallen, Mr. Douglas?

Related Video:

President Obama has a lot of things on his plate these days, what with an economy in shambles, multiple wars being fought and post-election rioting and death in Iran. What did he have to save in today’s press conference? Helene Cooper and Sheryl Gay Stolberg live blogged the Obama press conference for the New York Times. Click through and you’ll also find a transcript of the president’s opening remarks, too.

What I have here for you is highlights and comments. Considering that Cooper and Stolberg considered the president to have appeared “angrier” than he normally does, I’m sure you’ll want to know why. Perhaps coming to him right now with a bill that would remove restrictive caps on payday lending and same day loans. I’ll bide my time.

Iran dominated the opening statement

The president opened up with comments on what’s happening in Iran, saying that “The United States and the international community have been appalled and outraged by the threats, beatings, and imprisonments of the last few days. I strongly condemn these unjust actions, and I join with the American people in mourning each and every innocent life that is lost.” That definitely makes his position clear, but he added that the U.S. respects Iran’s sovereignty, which seems to indicate that America isn’t going to swoop in and force them to do a recount. That is as it should be. But Obama calls Iran’s bluff when they say that the U.S. instigated the post-election protests: “This tired strategy of using old tensions to scapegoat other countries won’t work anymore in Iran.”

After addressing an upcoming clean energy bill, the president addressed healthcare. While he is “very optimistic about the progress” Congress is making, there’s still a long way to go. Responding to anti-socialized medicine critics, Obama reiterated he wants to hold on to what works in our current system, so people who like their current doctor or plan should be able to keep them.

Any questions?

• Iran

Jennifer Loven of the AP opened questions by inquiring as to whether we plan to engage Iran She asked him if he still plans to engage with Iran’s regime, given the crackdown on protesters. Obama focused on his desire to make sure they do not develop a nuclear weapon, but left what kind of response we make up to Iran. The president clearly wants them to sort the election mess out themselves.

Another Iran question from the press gallery challenged Obama on why it “took so long” for him to respond with comments. “I don’t think that’s accurate,” the president argued. “The United States will not be a foil” for the Iranian government to accuse of meddling.”

• Healthcare

I say let’s ‘em crash. They couldn’t do the job on their own.

So will Obama make the public health plan mandatory? Jake Tapper of ABC wanted to know. Obama replied that “it is too early to say,” but I don’t see how he’ll be able to do anything else. A hybrid system seems to be on the way, one where insurers “can’t cherry-pick” healthy customers as they typically do now. Health will be the primary issue, not money.

Speaking of health, the new smoking ban was mentioned. Obama claims he has quit and is “95 percent cured.” He also claims the smoking bill wasn’t about him.

• Another stimulus?

Will the American economy require another stimulus package in order to keep the wheels of progress turning in the right direction?

“Not yet,” was Obama’s reply. That certainly isn’t a definitive “no,” is it? The president wants to wait and see how the economy evolves before re-scaling that mountain. “I’m not suggesting I have a crystal ball,” the president said.

Dark clouds continued to manifest. Unemployment rates will go over 10 percent, he claimed. April Ryan of American Urban Radio cited reports  that it will hit 20 for African-Americans, a troubling statistic. Will this bloodletting be allowed to continue?

It isn’t just a minority problem was President Obama’s response. The top priority is to “get the economy as a whole moving.” Proven jobs programs need more support from the government as opposed to building new ones. “Part of what we want to do is to find tools that will give people more opportunity, but the most important thing we can do is lift the economy overall,” he concluded.

• Concluded?

That’s right. The Obama press conference ended without one mention of Iraq or Afghanistan. As he was leaving the briefing room, one reporter tried to call the president on the omission, but there was no response. I do not like what this means for the men and women – many of them with families – who are in the field serving. Obama doesn’t come across as a warhawk, but these two wars have become a quagmire from which any president would have difficulty navigating out.

If you don’t have anything good to say, don’t say anything at all. Payday lending and same day loans weren’t on Obama’s mind, either. Clearly we have a struggle ahead of us on that front.

Related Video:

If it needs a kick-start trade it in

If you have multiple cars on blocks outside and no immediate plans to rearrange the furniture on your front lawn, perhaps you should give your homestead look a bit of summer loving. At the very least, you should take advantage of the Cash For Clunkers 2009 program and get something that will purr when you turn the key. Their car allowance rebate system should help the environment and change your lounging area from a rust garden into a place where grass will have a fighting chance.

But the operative word is should. Apparently, the Web site it up but the rules aren’t completely in place. Until then, use cash advances as the fast loans that help you make that down payment on a newer vehicle.

“Tell your dealers so we don’t have to!”

Justin Hyde of the Detroit Free Press reports that while Congress has passed Cash For Clunkers 2009 and the Web site www.cars.gov is in place, rules to govern the program could take up to a month to hammer out. That’s government efficiency for you.

Cars.gov so far is a source that offers information on how the exchange process (clunker for fuel-efficient roadster) will go down. It also urges consumers to contact their local dealers in order to talk them into registering for the program. To me, it seems that that should be the job of the government. I elected you for what reason, again? I pay taxes for… what was that again? Representation? What a concept!

Will Cash For Clunkers 2009 be enough incentive?

Congress has sent their approved version of the $1 billion bill to President Obama for his signature. As it stands, it is designed to give about 250,000 consumers $3,500 to $4,500 in money off the sticker price of a newer, more fuel-efficient vehicle. The original target was $4 billion and one million cars, but the real question is whether people who have held on to their rust buckets will even be able to afford the reduced-price cars once the deal is made. $3,500 to $4,500 isn’t that much if you’re talking a sticker price of $25,000 or more. It helps, but higher-priced vehicles will still be out of reach of many.

What about this delay? CNW Marketing/Research claims that the delay in getting the sign off by Congress is the culprit. Not only did they lessen the scope of the program – which means it will help only a quarter of those originally intended – but now car shoppers won’t be able to take advantage of the program through July. And guess what? There’s a November 1 cutoff, too! Perhaps it will read “between 11:57 p.m. and 12:01 a.m. on the third Tuesday of September by the time Obama’s done with it.

Even with the financial assistance, CNW predicts that buyers will be going primarily for Asian makes. Make it better and make it cheaper, America. Too many big, expensive hulks is what got the industry into this mess in the first place. Better, more fuel-efficient cars are better for the environment, too, although CNW believes that when it comes to Cash For Clunkers 2009, “the environmental impact will be minuscule considering the number of vehicles actually being replaced.”

Related Video:

For the average American, it can easily be argued that the most pressing though is whether the current recession is going to let up. For some, that thinking includes “When am I going to get a job?” These concerns are very real and very important. For those who are working but find themselves falling short on their bill payments because of unexpected things like car repairs, pay day loans and cheap loans are there to help. If you’re looking for information on those and want to apply, you’ve come to the right place.

But there are other crises that poke into our bubble. Like this one: “What should I think about North Korea’s missiles reaching Hawaii?” According to the BBC, it could happen. Thankfully, the U.S. military claims we are “prepared.”

Our protectors are “in a good position”

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has told BBC News that we are “in a good position” to protect ourselves against a potential North Korean missile strike. His ominous comment on the heels of a report that claims that North Korea was “considering launching a missile towards Hawaii.” In fact, Gates even told the BBC that “we do have some concerns if they were to launch a missile to the west in the direction of Hawaii.” Apparently, missile and radar systems are at the ready to “provide support” in the event of attack.

Admittedly, North Korea’s nuclear plans have been cause for concern. But is this just saber rattling by Kim Jong Il and North Korea? Or should we take this threat seriously. Judging by Gates’ statements, America plans to be prepared. However, I do hope that everyone keeps in mind that there is indeed no such thing as a winnable war, particularly if nuclear arms are involved. Diplomacy is always desirable over loss of life.

Weaseling around sanctions

North Korea has performed tests that could indicate that short-range missile delivery of nuclear warheads is in their plans. On May 25, they conducted an underground nuclear test. Since then, they’ve test-fired numerous short-range missiles. According to BBC sources there is currently a North Korean ship under surveillance to ensure that it does not violate United Nations sanctions.

On the financial front, North Korea may be preparing to find ways around financial sanctions. Reportedly, President Obama has warned all U.S. banks that attempt to “engage in deceptive practices” in order to get money in and out of the country. This would be in response to UN Security Council-imposed sanctions that followed North Korea’s nuclear tests. Considering that even their traditional allies – China and Russia – are demanding that Korea return to anti-nuclear proliferation negotiations, it seems that the odds are stacked against Kim Jong Il’s regime. No pay day loans or cheap loans can bail North Korea out of their sanction prison… and that’s the way it should be until they’re willing to play non-violent ball with the rest of the world.

Related Video:

"It tasks me. It tasks me..."

In case you missed it, President Obama has swatted a fly. And PETA, ever the grandstanding political ghoul, has called him on it. Mr. President, if the economic recession has made casualties of No-Pest strips and fly swatters, I will contribute online loans for instant cash. I will protect my country’s leader from insect attack!

Who is more brutishly Stalin-like here: the crackpot organization that traumatizes young children with grotesque images of slaughtered meat and bloodthirsty moms, or the mighty president who smashes tiny insects with his bare hands? Please, Mr. Obama, assign me to a collective farm now, where I will be on 24/7 microbe watch. I will fight them off for you with carbonated cow manure!

PETA, don’t you have adoptable animals to kill?

Stories abound about PETA’s record of domestic terrorism. Furthermore, PETA may just be hypocrites. They want President Obama to save a fly, but they can’t seem to save over 20,000 adoptable dogs and cats?

A tiny fly is a nuisance that can spread disease. I’d say that animals higher on the evolutionary chain than a fly – like President Obama and myself – deserve to protect ourselves from bacteria and possible illness. I’d go so far as to say that it’s our genetic imperative. Did you kill those 20,000-plus dogs and cats because it was necessary for your survival, PETA? Were the cats trying to steal your breath at night?

They want their milk-the-president for attention time

PETA has apparently sent the president a “Katcha Bug Humane Bug Catcher.” This device that could easily be replaced by a cup and a piece of junk mail “allows users to trap a house fly and then release it outside.” Thank you, PETA. Did you consider Roald Dahl’s flytrap model as presented in “Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator?” It goes something like this (see Fig. 1, left). Notice the right ladder has a rung missing. Fly climbs down after sugar cube treat, missed rung, falls and breaks neck. This trap was designed by the military.

Brilliant! Leave it in!

“We support compassion even for the most curious, smallest and least sympathetic animals,” said PETA spokesman Bruce Friedrich. “We believe that people, where they can be compassionate, should be, for all animals.”

Obama the Flyslayer

During a CNBC interview at the White House, President Obama gave the insect fair warning.

“Get out of here,” he told the fly. When it didn’t, Obama’s fist became the change the situation needed.

At this point, PETA was breathing very hard, excited by the opportunity to grandstand. “That was pretty impressive, wasn’t it? I got the sucker,” bellowed Barack Hussein Obama. Or at least that’s what the sovereign citizens out there would like to think, if they weren’t too busy with their little birthing project.

Calling all sovereign citizens: I hear a snipe has his birth certificate. Go hunt!

Happy Bruce

Bruce Friedrich continued to dig in his nails so reporters couldn’t escape. He said that “PETA was pleased with Obama’s voting record in the Senate on behalf of animal rights” and praised the president for his stance on animal abuse. Yet the PETA Obama fly conspiracy indicates, in his mind, that “he’s not perfect. And we’re happy to say that we wish he hadn’t.”

Happy? Happy that someone of profile justified your existence? Aspire to bigger things, Mr. Friedrich. Stupidity is greasy; applied to your link of the evolutionary chain, you could slip down to invertebrate level. If you need an artificial spine, perhaps the instant cash of online loans can help.

Related Video:

Why has America’s economy gone down the tubes? Why is it taking so long for it to crawl its way up and out of the porcelain bowl? There are many ways to answer these questions, but most will tell you that a lack of oversight and unwise risk taking have played key roles in the brush fire. Individuals can monitor their finances during tough times with a little bit of help from fast cash payday loans, but on the corporate and government levels, something bigger is needed.

That’s why President Obama is set to unveil “sweeping overhaul” of financial oversight in America. He thinks it’s high time a broken system was made right.

“A failure of a system”

Robert Schmidt reports for Bloomberg that Obama has said his plan to “refashion supervision of the U.S. financial system” is necessary to close gaping holes in the way oversight and risk taking have been managed. His proposal is considered “the biggest overhaul of market rules in more than seven decades,” writes Schmidt. Just one of many significant elements of the change would include a new regulatory board specifically for the biggest companies in America. Obama’s plan also includes the creation of an agency for monitoring consumer financial products, nominating the Federal Reserve as the watchman of companies who “are too big to fail” and a federal group to monitor private equity funds more tightly.

“This was a failure of the entire system,” Obama said. “An absence of oversight engendered systematic, and systemic, abuse.”

Obama would like this legislation ready for his signature by the end of 2009. However, he’s expecting there to be numerous political battles along the way.

The more things change…

Only the Office of Thrift Supervision would get the ax. Much of the current financial regulatory system would remain in place, which President Obama sees as a possible aid to getting future legislation passed, without the political turmoil a full shake-up could bring. However, Obama’s plan does state that “More can and should be done in the future. We focus here on what is essential: to address the causes of the current crisis, to create a more stable financial system that is fair for consumers and to help prevent and contain potential crises in the future.”

Just in time for the new Credit Card Bill of Rights and the cry for sweeping mortgage reform, a new Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) would monitor those agencies, ever on the lookout for “unfair terms and practices.” The CFPA would have the authority to ban bad practices and punish companies for violations with fines and penalties. It would also be able to raise the standards for banks and non-banks, something which is definitely needed.

Giving the Fed more authority

This prospect scares many who feel the Fed shouldn’t have the control over monetary policy that it already does, but President Obama is committed to giving them more oversight authority. The central bank would oversee all “risky” financial firms. What happened with Bear Stearns and Lehman last year cannot be repeated if America’s economy is to survive, so Obama is proposing that the Fed monitor banks and large financial companies. This includes insurers like AIG and hedge funds, which the current system allowed to run rampant with their financial shenanigans.

“These firms should not be able to escape oversight of their risky activities by manipulating their legal structure,” reads the White Paper report. “Our proposals would compel these firms to internalize the costs they could impose on society in the event of failure.”

Calls for emergency funding will not be filled with the near-automatic speed, which could offer Fed bashers some relief. Obama’s plan will curb some of their emergency lending power. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner would be required under the new plan to approve in writing any corporate requests for emergency money, which should streamline the process and (hopefully) weed out bad decisions. In addition to this responsibility, Geithner and the Treasury will be able to propose changes to the Fed’s structure in the interests of improving the central bank’s accountability.

Curing the sickness

I hope that we’ll be able to cure the sickness in America’s financial system soon. The quicker change is allowed to take place, the closer we’ll be to a system that doesn’t feed the rich at the expense of the middling poor. This oversight – this transparency – won’t mean fast cash right away, but a system that works for more of the people more of the time is a good thing. We need this sweeping overhaul. On a personal level, I would be able to make investments that help my bottom line. Payday loans for those little emergencies will still be there, but the health of the whole will be welcome.

Related Video:

Goforth's "historical keepsake photo"

America has neither the time nor money to deal with people who disseminate racial hatred. Why should we spend time obsessing over backward, ignorant individuals who have been taught to look at others as stereotypes rather than as real people? We have much more important things to do if America is going to move out of this economic recession and grow as a world superpower. We don’t have time to worry about the James Von Brunns of the world.

Speaking of recession, America certainly doesn’t have the money to deal with such low-watt bulbs. If racist overtures ever become offenses punishable by imprisonment (as civil rights groups appear to want), we’d be burdening taxpayers by increasing the prison population. Convicts don’t get payday loans and fast cash loans in jail, but they do get healthcare and various other basic amenities on our dollar. That’s the American way, no matter how much taxpayers kick and scream.

Sherri Goforth would be in jail if it were up to the NAACP

I don’t support racism. I believe that Sherri Goforth should have lost her job due to her racist E-mail depicting President Obama as a pair of “spook white” eyes against a coal-black background (see the “historical keepsake photo”). That she didn’t lose her job is shocking to me. But let’s pick up the story as reported by CNN…

Tennessee’s Democratic Party Chairman Chip Forrester wants Sherri Goforth, aide to Republican Sen. Diane Black, out on the street.  Black is the leader of the Tennessee Senate Republican Caucus.Goforth’s E-mail depiction of President Obama’s as two “cartoonish white eyes” alongside America’s previous 43 presidents is just too injurious to be met with only a reprimand, says Forrester. Goforth sent the image to fellow GOP staff members, but claimed later in her “defense” that she was sorry she had sent it “to the wrong people.”

Back away from the smelly carcass

According to the Tennessean newspaper, there is a note on the E-mail that claims it was “paid for by the Tennessee Republican Party.” Not surprisingly, GOP officials denied they produced it. The White House has yet to comment, probably because on their level, racist jokes, while harmful, pale in comparison to issues like war, healthcare and the economy.

However, the Tennessee State legislature has to police their own. And Sen. Black failed to do that. A reprimand will hardly change the ideologies Sherri Goforth appears to hold. Truly in this scenario, being fired is what hits where it hurts most.

Black was most concerned about covering her own behind. “I want to be sure that everyone understands that the communication was sent without my knowledge. It absolutely does not represent the beliefs or opinions of my office. I want to be very clear about that,” she said. On the advice of the state government HR office, Black issued a verbal and written reprimand. “If this should ever occur again, she will be terminated,” said Black.

Abusing the public trust

Reports indicate that Goforth has served her state for over 20 years and has had a clean record up to this time. For her part, she attempted to apologize, but she doesn’t appear to understand the real issue here. When you’re at work, you’re on taxpayer time. If you’re spending that time forwarding racist E-mails, you’re betraying the public trust. It is assumed you are doing important, state-related work when you’re on the job. “I’m very sick about it, and it’s one of those things I can’t change or take back” doesn’t change the fact that it happened. Voters and taxpayers alike deserve better.

“Is this indicative of what Senate Republicans think about our commander-in-chief?” asked Forrester. “I am calling on Sen. Black to reject this racist smear and fire this staffer who, on state government time, on state government computers, using a state government E-mail account, launched this bigoted attack on our president. Keeping her on the staff would send the message that this type of behavior is condoned by the Senate Republican Caucus.”

Tennessee needs better PR

Other state Democrats are speaking out against Sherri Goforth’s actions as well. Rep. Johnny Shaw said “I don’t think a reprimand is enough. I think this lady needs to go. I don’t think she should be a part of the people who represent the state of Tennessee.” Re. John Deberry Jr. told CNN Radio that “the last thing we need in the state of Tennessee is to send out the impression and the image that we are still stuck in some backwater mentality and culture that feels it’s OK to depict the president of the United States in that fashion.”

As Deberry’s statement indicates, this isn’t the first time Tennessee Republicans have shamed themselves, even recently. There was the  “Birds of a Feather” direct-mail message that featured pictured black crows with the heads of Barack Obama and Tennessee Rep. Nathan Vaughn (who is black). There was also Tennessee GOP Chairman Chip Saltsman’s song “Barack the Magic Negro,” which Saltsman sent to RNC members during his bid for RNC leadership. Now there’s Sherri Goforth’s E-mail. Grow up, Tennessee. If you do not endorse racism, let Goforth go home.

Related Video:

People in America have gotten used to freedom of choice. From a consumer finance standpoint, choosing an instant payday loan or online cash advance is a right no government should be able to take away. Many people hold a similar view when it comes to the thorny issue of healthcare in this country. The free market has given many people the ability to make choices that best suit their medical needs. However, a large (and perhaps mostly silent) group of people are finding that choice means nothing when none of the choices are affordable.

This is the group of people President Obama has in mind when he encourages America to move toward socialized medicine. This is a red hot button topic in politics these days. The concept of the cream of the income crop paying more into the healthcare system so that those less fortunate can have access to care has its supporters and detractors. Supporters cite successful examples from Canada, the United Kingdom, France and even the American Veterans Administration system of hospitals, saying that the level ground makes for a happier, healthier populace. Detractors claim socialized medicine subsidizes the irresponsible behavior of others who abuse their bodies and paralyzes private health insurance providers. Furthermore, they suggest that healthcare systems like those in Canada don’t always work.

FreeOurHealthcareNow.com says no

An unknown group is using FreeOurHealthcareNow.com as an online petition that people can sign if they think that socialized medicine is the wrong option for America. They are particularly concerned about government-run health insurance and care. Their petition reads as follows:

President Obama and Congress are pushing “reform” that will move America closer to a government-run system like Canada or Britain. If they succeed, most Americans will no longer be able to keep the insurance they have. Instead, they will be forced into a government-run health insurance market, with most people enrolled in a government-run health plan.

I support the following as key elements of any health care reform plan:

Choice: I support the right to choose my own doctor and to choose a health insurance plan that best fits my family’s needs and budget.

Access: I want to get the treatment I need, when I need it, without delay or denial and I want my health care to be patient-centered rather than government-centered.

Fairness: I want the same tax breaks employers get if I have to pay for may own health insurance; and I want government assistance redirected to those that truly need help.

Responsibility: I want more control to cover my own health care decisions and I want a system that encourages everyone to eliminate fraud, waste and abuse. I want insurance I can take with me if I have to change jobs.

In closing, FreeOurHealthcareNow.com prompts citizens to declare this: “I, the undersigned citizen of the United States, petition the U.S. Congress to stop any increased role of the government in my health care decisions, I also petition the U.S. Congress to protect my right to choose my own doctors and hospitals without delay or denial, to obtain care that is patient-centered, and to have health insurance that is personal, portable and best suits my needs.”

Americans will have the chance to choose very soon

Click the pic to spin this record

It appears Democratic lawmakers are at least willing to put the socialized medicine option out there to see if it sticks. But most do not agree with President Obama’s hearty endorsement of it. They want to continue to offer improved private options.

But make no mistake, you must choose. If you don’t, you just might be hit with tax hikes.

David Espo reports for the Associated Press that senior House Democrats are “considering slapping an unspecified financial penalty on anyone who refuses to purchase affordable health insurance.” Furthermore, Democrats are considering a new tax on certain insurance benefits as a means of covering those who have been uninsured.

Choice A or Choice B

Private insurance or the government option are your choices. Under the House Democratic plan, “individuals and small businesses would be able to purchase coverage from a health exchange and the government would require all plans to contain a minimum benefit,” writes Espo. One welcome aspect of this is that applicants would be exempt from rejection or a higher premium due to pre-existing conditions.

Then there’s the Medicaid upgrade option. Democrats are seeking a uniform level of coverage across the nation. A revamped Medicaid would also up the payments to health professionals (thanks to a tax hike, doubtless).

“Play or pay”

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., who is the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, has confirmed that there will be a penalty for those who refuse to buy coverage they can afford. It’s “play or pay.” Waivers would be available for those who could not cover the cost of insurance.

“There is no use having a mandate without a contribution,” he said.

Democratic leaders hope to pass legislation in both houses by early August. Then they hope that a compromise measure will be ready for the president’s signature by the fall.

$1 trillion over 10 years

Financing socialized medicine as Obama envisions it could cost $1 trillion over the next decade, experts predict. Cutting Medicare payments to home health care, pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, hospitals and others to cover the expense has been considered, but it is unclear how effective that would be at closing the expense gap. The idea welcomes a rash of other criticisms as well.

Locating areas for saving within the private insurance market is still underway, and this would perhaps be an ideal option to the majority of those concerned. Raising taxes on healthcare would go against the president’s previous pronouncements, but sometimes a politician has to do a 180 and be willing to go face down in the mud.

Getting rid of dead weight

Obama would be mostly alone there if he went with socialized medicine. FreeOurHealthcareNow.com would suey like a pig headed for a future in bacon. But Senator Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, would apparently be in Obama’s corner. According to Espo, she has been searching for a compromise that would hold government-funded healthcare as a last resort for those who cannot afford insurance, even after a Congressional overhaul of the current diseased system.

Personally, I’m willing to pay higher taxes for universal healthcare. The private system has had time to regulate itself via competition and it clearly hasn’t worked. If self-regulation were possible, I’d consider that first, to be sure. However, I look at healthcare and education as basic human rights (not privileges). If socialized medicine becomes a reality in America, I would like to see private companies be absorbed into the process rather than see them simply disappear. Of course some turnover would be inevitable, but I’d like to limit that to some of the top healthcare executive class (expensive dead weight). They’d serve America better hawking ShamWows or joining hands to form live border fences. Once in a while, consumers can pitch in with an instant payday loan or online cash advance to feed them. Because they mustn’t leave their posts near places like Juarez or the Akwesasne Mohawk Nation. Leaving their positions is bad for our health.

Related Video:

The expression “freedom isn’t free” means a lot to me. The sacrifices service men and women have made (and continue to make) in service of their country are worthy of recognition to the extent that they are helping to protect the rights and way of life of people they’ve never met. In short, I “support the troops.” But let’s follow the story here, a quick loan from the pages of history, a loan that President Obama should repay with interest.

The ties of duty and the promise that he would make sure people would know what transpired at Buchenwald concentration camp have driven retired Army intelligence officer Albert Rosenberg for over 60 years. Now 91 and living in El Paso, Texas, Rosenberg collected evidence at Nazi concentration camp Buchenwald back in April of 1945. His directive was to “investigate what really happened in that particular (liberated) camp,” Rosenberg said to Darren Meritz of the El Paso Times. “The allied governments wanted to know what happened in those camps.” The report Rosenberg and his colleagues produced was quickly classified because it contained the names of Communist foreign officials from nations with which the United States was attempting to form diplomatic ties.

Now Rosenberg’s copy has resurfaced

And he’s “looking to the White House for help in what may be the last mission of his life,” writes Meritz.

This coincides with President Obama’s recent visit to the site of Buchenwald concentration camp. Rosenberg remembered a list of 321 captured U.S. Army and British Royal Air Force men who had been held at Buchenwald. He sent that list to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel with a handwritten note explaining how these men needed to be identified. The wounds needed to heal.

Unfortunately, Rosenberg still has not heard back from Washington.

Discovery!

“What became of these fliers, we could not determine in 1945,” Rosenberg wrote to Emanuel. “It can be assumed that many may have perished or moved in death transports to the interior of Nazi-held territory.”

Those that were found had been subject to starvation and other forms of cruelty that the fog of war cannot conceal. The Nazis had attempted to conceal records when they left Buchenwald concentration camp behind, but some evidence has unintentionally left behind after their hasty retreat.

“Among my papers that I have kept, I came across typewritten pages that were part of our original report, which lists the name, rank and serial numbers of American pilots who had been shot down during the war by the Nazis and who had been prisoners at the concentration camp,” Rosenberg said. “They no longer were at the camp. I have no idea what happened to them.”

Searching for answers

If President Obama’s visit to Buchenwald concentration camp will shed some light on Rosenberg’s list, the veteran will be happy.

After all of these many years, Albert Rosenberg has never learned whether the Buchenwald report has been declassified. He does know that the original copy had been kept at a National Archives depository in Virginia, in box 149. Unfortunately, a fire during the 1970s destroyed the report.

Stand up

At the time, that was believed to be it. Experts thought that all of the remaining copies of the Buchenwald report had disappeared. That is, until Rosenberg emerged with his own copy. In 1995, all of the material he had collected – both the first-hand testimonies and the other evidence – was collected and translated from German to English. Then it was published in book form for all the world to see, so that the questions could be answered. That name of that book, fittingly, is “The Buchenwald Report,” written by David Hackett.

Tear down that wall

“For decades people had been looking for that report,” Rosenberg said. “I do not know, have the families of those prisoners, American fliers, ever been identified? Did they survive? I don’t know.”

Buchenwald concentration camp “represents a painful gap in (Rosenberg’s) knowledge,” writes Meritz. But he has not forgotten what sacrifices men and women like them have made in the pursuit of freedom. President Obama’s visit to the camp is a start, but more can be done to make sure that families who have gone decades without knowing what exactly happened to their loved ones during that horrible war deserve closure. The system of classifying documents is questionable to say the least (Dick Cheney and his cavalier attitude toward classified memos on waterboarding is just one example). But too much time has passed. The walls must come down and America must do what is right by humanity. No more can a mere trickle of information here or there suffice. No quick loan, a loan that will never be enough until the floodgates are opened will stand. President Obama, tear down that wall of institutional ignorance.

Related Video:

Considering how peace-loving and well-adjusted militia-members tend to be, I’m not sure how comfortable I am with their plans to govern America. Honestly, I just can’t overlook people like Daniel James Murray and their plans to “kill the president.” Voting with election choices rather than bullets seems much more effective and much more legal. For you see, bullets tend to eliminate choices. Without choice, we put freedom and political self-determination in the ground. I’ll make my own choices (like where and when I use installment loans for quick cash), thank you.

Brian Kates reports for the New York Daily News that President Obama may be far removed from the danger of Daniel James Murray while he’s in the Middle East attempting to repair the bridges with the Muslim world that former President George W. Bush and crew set to dynamite. Yet the Murray threat is one that must be dealt with. Homeland Security should be able to find him via surveillance (warrantless or otherwise). Then the net will close in around him.

TMI for St. George

According to reports, Daniel James Murray made a threat against President Obama’s life while making a withdrawal at a St. George, Utah bank. As every resident of Utah has a batphone that connects directly to Mitt Romney no matter where he is, the news was sent out immediately. News of the threat, and news of Daniel James Murray’s incoherent babbling that he’d like us to believe is a cogent mission statement for whatever “mountain man” or “free man” club he no doubt belongs to.

Now a warrant for his arrest has been issued and the Secret Service is in the middle of a full-fledged manhunt.

Murray is reported to have exclaimed that he is “on a mission” to kill the president. That tends to attract attention, as did his request to withdraw $13,000 – in bills no larger than $50 – from the First National Bank in St. George.

But there’s much more

“We are on a mission to kill the President of the United States,” Murray told the bank manager on May 27. This came after he opened his account with $85,000 on May 19. The next time Daniel James Murray came in to the bank was the day he needed the $13,000, which was a problem at first because he lacked proper identification. In front of bank security cameras, here’s what he had to say about that:

With all this mess going on under President Obama with banks and the economy. I’m sure if citizens happen to lose their money, they will rise up and we could see killing and deaths… We are 94 million miles from the sun, and are in between the sun and moon, and the eagle that flies between them and it’s a giant step for mankind.

If I don’t get this money, someone is going to die.

I have traveled thousands of miles to be here and know things that are going to happen. The banking system will fail and people will die. There will be chaos in the world.

Small bills for small minds

Daniel James Murray “would not accept a check and demanded bills no larger than $50,” writes Kates. In the spirit of service, the bank manager had to get involved. Interestingly, the transaction (for what, guns and ammo?) was approved. Then Murray went on the above rant, according to court documents.

Oh, and by the way, he came back to the same bank the next day to close his account. How’s that for national security? Dick Cheney had the right idea when he said we MUST… FOCUS… ON… SADDAM. I feel must safer now. I hear Dick likes small bills, too.

Now Daniel James Murray is gone

You’ll only get so many chances, law enforcement. Now the man has gone back underground with his money. A court affidavit indicates he has lived in New York, but has also been in California, Utah, Georgia, Oklahoma and perhaps possibly Texas. Furthermore, Daniel James Murray has “at least eight registered firearms,” according to the Secret Service.

Honestly, Mr. Murray, just go live off the grid somewhere. Farm, watch the sunset and enjoy the eagles that fly between the solar orb and this vibrationally attuned rock. Just keep your missions to yourself and I won’t include your manifesto in loans for quick cash installment loans anymore. Tends to take the sting out of your political rants.

Related Video:

A few months ago, Barack Obama made an embarrassing comment about the widow Nancy Reagan and seances. See the video at the end of this article for his exact words. However, since then the president has apologized for having offended. Now, Nancy Reagan will come to the White House to meet with the current First Lady, Michelle Obama.

Rachel Swarns blogs for the New York Times that Mrs. Obama and Reagan will meet for the first time over lunch at the White House. It should be a delightful affair.

Commemorating Dutch’s 100th birthday

Nancy Reagan is in Washington D.C. for “the unveiling of a statue in the Capitol of her husband, President Ronald Reagan,” writes Swarns. The seven-foot statue is being placed in commemoration of Ronald “Dutch” Reagan’s 100th birthday. Apparently changes needed to be made to the original casting (per Nancy’s instructions), but no easy payday loan or payday loans from direct lender were needed to fund the changes.

Michelle Obama and Mrs. Reagan have spoken during the transition period for President Obama, and Mrs. Obama reportedly had a few questions for the former First Lady regarding life in the great big White House.

In a Vanity Fair interview, Nancy admitted that she has encouraged Mrs. Obama to have lots of state dinners. Apparently, the Reagans enjoyed playing host for heads of state and other important officials during their years in Washington, and Nancy hopes that Michelle can enjoy similar success during her husband’s time in office.

A maven for science

Nancy Reagan also told the magazine that President Obama missed a “golden opportunity” when he didn’t invite her to the ceremony at which he announced his decision to reverse former President George W. Bush’s policy on embryonic-stem-cell-research. Apparently the former Hollywood star is more forward-thinking than the Bush family progeny. Considering how her husband suffered from Alzheimer’s Disease, she would know just how important such research can be toward improving the quality of life of millions.

“I would have gone, and you know I don’t like to travel,” Mrs. Reagan said. “Politically it would have been a good thing for him to do. Oh well, nobody’s perfect. He called and thanked me for working on it. But he could have gotten more mileage out of it.”

Michelle: gracious, friendly

Michelle Obama is looking to make a good impression during her stay in the White House. According to Swarns, she had already consulted with former first ladies Hillary Clinton and Rosalynn Carter before moving in, and she even had lunch with Mrs. Carter and daughter Amy.

Related Video:

Judge Sonia Sotomayor could go all the way to the Supreme Court. But this time, it isn’t because one of her decisions is being overturned by the conservative justices. And it isn’t because she was involved in a ruling on consumer finance products like installment loans or quick cash loans. President Obama has named Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court.

Kris Alingod reports for All Headline News that Sonia Sotomayor is the president’s pick to fill the soon-to-be-vacant slot that retiring Justice David Souter will leave. Sotomayor must still receive Senate approval, but sweet sassy mollassy, is Fox News already up in arms. It’s no surprise. Griping over the liberal wave is all that keeps them from drowning.

Sonia Sotomayor: the empathy judge?

This is President Obama’s first appointment to the Supreme Court, one that he has come by after due consultation with bipartisan lawmakers. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), Minority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) were in the committee. Justice Souter is retiring in the summer of 2009, so the time is now to seek confirmation. The court’s next term begins October 5. Will the Senate (which is predominantly liberal) confirm Obama’s choice of Sotomayor?

But the lingering question Senate leaders had after their meeting with Obama is his use of the word “empathy.” It’s what he wants in a candidate, which could mean that he was reaching for a female, minority viewpoint. I’d like to think Supreme Court picks are based solely on qualifications. Of course, the bias the political party in power wishes to exploit is a consideration, but pandering is unbecoming. Senator McConnell worried about the implications “empathy” would have regarding bias:

Empathy implied that you were on somebody’s side before you heard the case. We did have a discussion about the importance of following the law and not acting like a legislator on the bench… if I were making this nomination, empathy would not be a word that I would have chosen.

Having said that, the President gets to make the nomination and we’ll make our judgment based on the nominee’s record.

Justice David Souter

The American people could ask for nothing more from its elected officials. Consider the record and vote accordingly. Similarly, if the citizenry would consider the record quick cash loans have on temporary financial well-being, I’d hope they’d base their voting positions on the hard data, rather than unsubstantiated anecdotes from media scare stories. They’d see that installment loans have a sterling record for helping responsible consumers.

Making the American people “proud”

That’s what Senator Sessions hopes the Senate will achieve in their evaluation of Sotomayor. When Obama was a senator, he voted against G.W. Bush Supreme Court appointees Alito and Roberts, Sessions said. However, Obama gave thoughtful reasons for his objections. Sessions praised Justice Souter for giving notice early enough in the season for President Obama and the Senate to go through an even-handed, unhurried process of testing Judge Sonia Sotomayor for confirmation. The process – as Sessions sees it – can “go forward in a way that the American people can be proud of.”

During the last presidential campaign, Republicans complained that Obama did not make America proud during his Senate career when he threw his support behind “activist judges” or objected to conservatives Roberts and Alito. Yet the pair made it into the Supreme Court due to the conservative majority in the Senate at the time. That’s actually good news for free market enterprise, as those of conservative bent tend to side for consumer financial freedoms like the right to installment loans and quick cash loans.

Sotomayor on the record

How has Judge Sonia Sotomayor ruled on key issues? That is indicative of the nominee’s record, is it not? The New York Times has provided a convenient report. Let’s take a look. Plus, here’s a Sonia Sotomayor biography.

• Racial discrimination

The case that put Sotomayor’s name in lights, so to speak, is Ricci v. DeStefano. It’s also the crux of the conservative argument against her. They’re claiming Sotomayor is racist, because she failed to stand against reverse discrimination. The details are that a group of white firefighters (one Hispanic) in New Haven, Connecticut were passed over for promotions. In their lawsuit, they alleged that this occurred because there were no eligible African-American candidates for consideration. In my book, they should have been promoted if their service record warranted. Would it somehow be tainted if there were no black candidates to consider? Ridiculous, I assure you.

Judge Sotomayor (as part of an appeals court panel) ruled in favor of rejecting the firefighters’ lawsuit and declined to rehear the case. Now the Supreme Court is reconsidering the case. The consideration is whether diversity in the workplace should be treated any differently from diversity in the classroom. In such a case (Gant v. Wallingford Board of Education), Sotomayor found that racial discrimination did indeed occur when an African-American child was demoted from first grade back to kindergarten.

“The school did not give the black student an equal chance to succeed (or fail),” ruled Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Were the firefighters given the same chance, Judge Sotomayor?

• Lawsuits against federal contractors

As evidenced in an opposing memo, Judge Sotomayor is “willing to expand constitutional rights beyond the text of the Constitution.” She ruled that a federal prisoner (in Makesko v. Correctional Services Corporation) who suffered a heart and attack and related injuries   could indeed sue the company that ran his facility for the Federal Bureau of Prisons. It seems that Makesko had previously been allowed to use an elevator instead of the facility stairs due to his heart condition, but a guard had forced him to use stairs one time.

The result was Makesko’s heart attack and injuries suffered from falling down said stairs. Judge Sotomayor “emphasized precedents that permitted suits against companies performing state government functions,” writes the New York Times. But here again, the Supreme Court reversed Sotomayor’s decision. Their ruling was that only individuals – not corporations – may be sued in these cases. The vote in the highest court was close, however. Justices Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer dissented. Surprising no one, the conservative wing voted for big business protection. I give Sotomayor a big plus for her vote, however, as big businesses like the government shouldn’t be allowed to circumvent the law in this way.

• Environmental protection

What’s more important to you: cost cutting or the value of life? Judge Sonia Sotomayor voted for the latter (in Riverkeeper v. Environmental Protection Agency) when she ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency was in violation of the Clean Water Act when they sided with cost effectiveness of avoiding upgrades over saving aquatic organisms endangered by a power plant. Judge Sotomayor ruled that “weighing the costs of the changes against the value of the organisms in dollars” was unlawful.

And a conservative Supreme Court overturned Sotomayor again, in spite of the fact that Justices Stevens, Ginsburg and Souter dissented. Preservation of life must be the highest priority in my opinion. While it is impossible for human industry to have no detrimental impact upon our environment, a minimal “footprint” is most desirable. Achieving it at cost is the goal experts should strive toward.

• Workplace discrimination: disabilities

I have worked with students who have learning disabilities, so this topic is of particular interest to me. Judge Sotomayor ruled that a law school graduate with a reading and learning disability should be allowed to receive extra time in taking the bar exams. The Supreme Court ruled that Americans With Disabilities Act did not apply to the female student, in that her condition could be managed with glasses and medication. Thus, Sotomayor was overruled – again – and asked to retry the case (Bartlett v. New York State Board of Law Examiners). Sticking to her guns, Sotomayor ruled once more that the woman was disabled and deserved accommodations.

• International law

Sotomayor’s ruled in favor of the Hague Convention on International Child Abduction in Croll v. Croll. It involved a child custody case where one parent took the child out of the country of residence without the permission of the court and the non-custodial parent. The court ruled that the removal of the child by the custodial mother was not wrong (because she had primary custody rights). Judge Sotomayor dissented, asking for a “broader interpretation of custody that is more in line with the object and purpose of the Hague Convention.” This question of interpretation is currently before the Supreme Court in Abbott v. Abbott.

• Second Amendment

With President Obama threatening to take guns away, the Second Amendment has been in the news quite a bit lately. Judge Sotomayor appears to be very much in Obama’s court on this one, as she rejected a claim (in Maloney v. Cuomo) that banning nunchaku (a martial arts weapon) violated a man’s Second Amendment rights. Interestingly, Sotomayor claimed that the Second Amendment only applied to the federal government.

How convenient for the federal government! I suppose that Warren Zevon’s “Lawyers, Guns and Money” was prophetic. First, Franklin Delano Roosevelt confiscates our gold, now the rights of citizens to bear arms is under fire… it’s hitting the fan right about now.

• Abortion

Not an uncontroversial topic in the bunch here. Judge Sotomayor served on a Circuit Court where she denied a claim brought by an abortion rights group against a President George W. Bush (The Center for Reproductive Law and Policy v. Bush) policy. Sotomayor upheld Bush’s policy that prohibited foreign organizations on U.S. soil from receiving foreign funds for either performing or supporting abortions. This is part “keep it in America,” part indicative that Sotomayor does have conservative leanings in their somewhere.

Judge Sonia Sotomayor – your Supreme Court Justice?

It remains to be seen how the Senate will vote in Sotomayor’s confirmation hearing. Judging by the liberal Democratic majority now, I’ll give you three guesses how this will turn out. But I hold out some major caveats over the choice, myself. I’m all for a Supreme Court Justice who is female, Hispanic and (most importantly) qualified. But as my comments above indicate, I have concerns over how Sotomayor will rule on some of our essential freedoms. Will she side with Obama in his drive to regulate installment loans and quick cash loans out of existence? Stay tuned.

Related Video:

Recently, the House of Representatives approved President Obama’s Credit Card Bill of Rights. In a nutshell, it protects consumers against sudden rate hikes and hidden fees. Unlike fast loans and short term loans, credit card companies depend upon fees hidden deep in the legalese in order to bleed more money from already overspent taxpayers. Now some new information has come to light about a number of proposed credit card practices that will hurt responsible customers while riskier ones are aided by Obama’s policies.

Andrew Martin reports for the New York Times that the days of good customers being able to take advantage of cash-back and frequent flier rewards may be a thing of the past. Not only that, but the previously shunned annual fee may be returning – and some say it’s just to get extra money out of the customers who always pay on time.

From Bush’s Dennis Moore to Obama’s Robin Hood

Lessening penalties on risky borrowers is the name of the game with the Senate credit card bill, but what of the good customers? It almost seems backward from the credit card companies’ point of view. Late payers and those in default produce billions of dollars in fees for the credit card industry, so let’s take… less? Although those consumers clearly need to regulate their spending behavior, this legislation is good for them (particularly during this recession).

To make up for that lost income, the credit card companies will target consumers with good credit. It sounds like an Obama Robin Hood plan. Will this drive more good customers to rely on cash  – plus fast loans and short term loans – and leave their credit cards behind?

The hit list… where good customers are on the firing line

Here’s what banks will be loading in their credit card cannons and firing upon clean credit consumers with extreme prejudice:

1. Annual fees (formerly the mark of a credit card you wouldn’t want)
2. Cutting out cash-back and other rewards programs
3. Charging interest right away on a purchase instead of allowing a grace period

“It will be a different business,” said Edward Yingling, CEO of the American Bankers Association. “Those that manage their credit well will in some degree subsidize those that have credit problems.” It will be a socialist coup for the Obama administration. Get ready to eat crow, capitalists. This was the man you voted into office.

Interest rates will still go up

Major credit card companies like American Express, Citigroup, Bank of America and others have begun to raise interest rates already, but now the bulls eye on responsible customers is just too much. Ultra-profit is unnecessary; reasonable policies and the convenience of credit cards should be enough for them to generate good business. The upcoming Senate credit card bill will not cap those interest rates, so banks will be allowed to continue to raise the bar. But they’ll have to do it slowly and with greater disclosure of term changes.

A flat rate? What’s that?

Once, banks issued credit cards to only the best consumers. A flat interest rate of 20 percent was the norm, and there was an annual fee for the service. Changes in usury laws and the establishment of the credit reporting agencies prompted banks to invent variable rates that were geared toward what they perceived to be the credit risk of the cardholder.

The obvious result of this new practice – which began to take hold in the 1980s – is that credit card companies began to exact significant revenue from the bottom end. America’s current economic recession has changed that model, as those lower-end consumers are much less able to pay than before. Now low-end customers get dumped by banks, or their credit limits are lowered. The money has to come from somewhere, so as I’ve said, the banks take it from the good customers.

“How much do we make? We’re not at liberty to disclose.”

Penalty interest rates and late fees are two areas where the government does not require that banks give up the tally. Clearly it’s a significant figure, though. Experts estimate that the figure had increased by around $1 billion annually in recent years. This year, some predict it will top $20 billion.

Simply curbing interest rates will cost credit card companies a great deal. Last December, the Federal Reserve figured it would cost them around $12 billion a year in lost fees and income. The credit card bill under consideration in Congress would, according to Martin’s article, “build on the Fed rules and further squeeze banks’ revenue when they are being hit with a high rate of credit card charge-offs.”

Weep not for credit card companies

It’s difficult to generate sympathy for credit card companies, who have made billions off unfair, deceptive practices.

“The business model will change because the business model doesn’t work for the public,” said Gail Hillebrand, a senior lawyer at Consumers Union. “In order to do business under the new rules, they’ll actually have to tell you how much it’s going to cost.”

Austan Goolsbee, an economic adviser to President Obama, recognizes credit card issuers’ right to profit, but he believes they must do so honestly and not to excess. Excessive rate increases and hidden fees that had become increasingly common amounted to “a series of carjackings,” he said.

“Are there no prisons?”

Goolsbee closes with a telling statement about the sickening attitude credit card companies have about their business: “The card industry is giving the argument that if you didn’t want to be carjacked, why weren’t you locking your doors or taking a different road?”

President Obama’s credit card bill is a mixed bag. The drive for mega-profits have made monsters of them all. Rest assured that fast loans and short term loans to not carry the same stigma.

Related Video:

A rare glimpse of a discoboat dinosaur on its way to the tar pits. Oh look... it's already stuck!

Aside from rampant overproduction and an overall lack of quality, one of the major reasons the discoboat dinosaurs of the American automobile industry are in over their heads financially – and in dreadful need of a big payday cash loan from a giant check cashing business – is that their record on producing environmentally friendly vehicles has been sorely lacking. That’s why the CAFE standards President Obama is going to require of the nation’s automakers is so important. With better, more fuel-efficient vehicles, sales will eventually increase and the recession will be beaten back.

Environment News Service (ENS) reports that President Obama is determined to make the CAFE standards the “highest auto fuel efficiency standards ever attempted in the United States.” Aside from the obvious benefit to the environment, the development of new greener technologies should eventually begin to stimulate job growth within the diseased auto industry as production capability and demand increase.

A ship-shape fleet

If Obama’s upgraded CAFE standards (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) are adopted as expected, the required fleet car average for fuel efficiency would be 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016. Currently, the CAFE standard is 27.5 mpg for cars and 24 mpg for light trucks. Obama’s national CAFE standards – would begin with 2012 model cars.

An unnamed government official commented that “the projected oil savings of this program over the life of this program is 1.8 billion barrels of oil.” Furthermore, the official claims that under President Obama’s proposal, “tailpipe emissions would fall by more than 30 percent.”

Obama has an ally in California

California is one of 13 states that has been petitioning the Environmental Protection Agency for years for permission to enact their own emissions standards. These standards would have been significantly more strict than the national standard (reducing harmful emissions by 30 percent in passenger cars by 2016 has been the Golden State’s goal). California supports Obama’s drive for heightened CAFE standards that former President George W. Bush refused. Now the EPA is reconsidering California’s previous request.

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will be on hand to attend the president’s CAFE standards announcement.

“If EPA does grant the waiver, California has agreed that they will defer to the proposed national standard that we are announcing tomorrow,” according to the unnamed official.

The industry-wide effect

“It’s important to note that all companies will be required to make more efficient and cleaner cars,” said the official. “We do that by proposing individual standards for each class size of vehicle and then a fleet average for each company. This has the effect of preserving consumer choice – you can continue to buy whatever size car you like, all cars get cleaner.”

Is anyone surprised that the world’s major automakers said in a joint statement that they’ll support Mr. Obama’s CAFE standards statement? The rest of the industrialized world has generally been ahead of America on environmental issues, and the American automakers have no leeway for argument, considering their sorry state and total dependence on taxpayer dollars.

One national standard, no red tape

For seven long years, there has been a debate over whether states or the federal government should regulate autos. President Obama’s announcement ends that old debate by starting a federal rule making to set a National Program. Automakers are committed to working with the President to develop a national program administered by the federal government. All industries will be called upon to reduce carbon emissions. Automakers play an important role.

Having a national program in place will prevent conflicting standards and give automakers a leg up on long-term product planning. Over the life of the program, experts predict there would be a reduction of 900 million metric tons of greenhouse gas. According to the official, “That is equivalent to taking 177 million cars off the road or shutting down 194 coal plants.”

Following California’s example

President Obama has directed the Department of Transportation to work in tandem with the White House and relevant federal agencies to “coordinate multi-year CAFE standards by April 2010,” writes the ENS.

Executive Director Bill Becker of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies is excited with the changes to come.

“Wish they all could be California… cars? Well under an historic agreement between California and the auto manufacturers, now they will be,” said Becker. “After an initial phase-in, every new vehicle sold in every state in the country will be required to meet California’s clean car greenhouse gas standards. And that’s not all; the auto manufacturers have agreed to drop their contentious litigation and support this landmark regulatory program. Few actions could have a more profound impact in the fight against global warming.”

Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, is equally enthusiastic that the adoption of the new CAFE standards will be a step in the right direction:

President Obama, the state of California, the auto industry, and environmental leaders have come together around a global warming solution that will strengthen our economy and put the auto industry on the path to a clean energy future. The future of the auto industry lies in making cleaner, more fuel-efficient vehicles that reduce global warming pollution and our dependence on oil.

A triple play

“The new clean car standard being announced tomorrow by President Barack Obama is a triple play – it will help move America off foreign oil, save families money, and spur American businesses to take the lead in developing the job-creating, clean-energy technologies of the future,” said Daniel Weiss, director of Climate Strategy at the Center for American Progress.

“The new standard will dramatically reduce oil use and help make cars go significantly further on a gallon of gas,” he said. “It will also help American car companies make the super-clean cars of the future. And finally, it will help us compete with China, whose leaders have already announced their intention to become the worldwide leader in the production of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.”

The open road awaits

“Automakers are selling 130 models of automobiles that achieve 30 mpg or greater on the highway,” McCurdy said. “Consumers can now test drive 35 models of hybrids or clean diesel in dealer showrooms. More technology is on its way to market.”

Thanks to the proposed new CAFE standards, the American automobile industry will be an exciting place again soon. It’s palpable, a veritable shiny check for chasing. Once the specter of their collapse (and need of a gigantic payday cash loan from the American people) vanishes, America could be heading back to the top of the automobile industry.

Related Video:

I am not a fan of the Center For Responsible Lending. It isn’t because I’m against responsible lending, it’s because at the root, they do not in fact advocate responsible lending. Any group whose leadership supports toxic housing market activities of Herbert Sandler, Golden West Financial, World Savings Bank, Self-Help, Inc. and the ugly organization of our times – ACORN – cannot be trusted as an honest authority on responsible lending. I’ll take installment loans as needed, regardless of their dubious claims backed by flawed research.

However, that being said, they do have some reasonable things to say. In a recent press release, the CRL encourages citizens to tell their Senators to support H.R. 627, legislation that would help millions of credit card holders.

Consumers have been held hostage

The United States Senate is in the process of voting on credit card legislation that could help customers “avoid hidden fees and penalties,” as well as “unfair retroactive interest rate increases.”  The CRL takes the high road and encourages consumers to act now by telling elected officials to support H.R. 627 in the Senate. If you aren’t sure who to talk to, try Visible Vote, a handy app for the iPhone, Blackberry and Facebook.

The Senate bill, according to the CRL, is “even stronger than what the House passed on April 30.” H.R. 627, aka the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 (or the “Credit CARD Act“) would take long overdue measures to guard multitudes of consumers against abusive practices that credit card companies have had on the books as business as usual for some time. During this difficult economy, it’s all the more important for legislators to look after the populace and protect them from nefarious policies. President Obama believes H.R. 627 will help steer the country in that direction; now’s it’s time for the vote.

According to the CRL, here are the key things H.R. 627 would accomplish in the bloated credit card market:

• Allowing increased interest rates on existing balances only after borrowers are 60 days late in making a payment
• Prohibiting over-the-limit fees unless consumers affirmatively take steps to allow over-the-limit transactions to be approved
• Requiring payments above the minimum payment to be allocated to the highest-interest rate balances first

They even provide a link where consumers can take action and make their elected officials aware of their opinions about credit card companies. For those who prefer to call, the Senate switchboard number is (202) 224-3121.

A CRL study? OK, just go with it this time…

Selective Interpretation?, a recent study commissioned by the CRL, points out that the top eight credit card companies – representing 80 percent of balances – are raising interest rates and increasing fees right before our eyes. The Federal Reserve has issued new rules to regulate this, but it won’t go into effect until July 2010. In the interim, H.R. 627 is absolutely necessary to stem the tide of greed on the part of credit card companies.

The study continues to hold credit card companies’ heels to the fire:

In the last six months, all continue to hike interest rates on existing balances on an “any time, any reason” basis; CRL estimates at least 10 million account holders received rate hikes.  Five of the top eight increased transaction fees, late fees, or fees for account maintenance.  At least one top issuer broadened the definition of several other fees – over-the-limit, returned payment, and convenience-check fees – so more customers are required to pay them.

We can’t afford runaway fees and limitless credit card company greed. Tell your Senator to vote yes on H.R. 627.

Related Video:

They all need to be in different places at the same time - rush hour. Can President Obama help?

Part of President Obama’s gigantic economic omnibus package (of stimulus!) are a number of interesting provisions that will contribute toward the improvement of America’s infrastructure. I’m talking roads, bridges, pipelines, waste water systems, power grids and much more. Rebuilding, retrofitting, remodeling and rethinking the way American commerce moves about this great nation is key toward expanding American business for a bright future. It will play a key role in our escape from the economic downturn. It will make America as great as it wants to be again, without short term loans and debt relief to prop it up.

And with Build America Bonds, it could just happen. Give it time and we’ll see what happens. In addition to infrastructure improvements, Build America Bonds projects will promote job growth and further the president’s commitment to greener industrial projects in America. Just don’t expect a full turnaround until Obama’s second term…

Further stimulus for a stagnant economy

Steven Strahler reports for Crain’s Chicago Business that the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority is “the first governmental unit in the state to issue Build America Bonds, part of the Obama administration’s economic stimulus effort.”

Build America Bonds are an attractive option for the country in that they offer a 35 percent federal interest-rate subsidy. The sale price of $500 million is “priced at a net interest cost of less than four percent,” writes Strahler. According to the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority, this “compares well with tax-exempt issues.”

Potential issuers of Build America Bonds at this point could be the State of Illinois or Cook County, among others.

Investors want a big piece of the action

Investors are chomping at the bit to get their hands on Build America Bonds. They have obtained more than $8 billion in the bonds from issuers like the New Jersey Turnpike Authority and the Sacramento, California Municipal Utility District. More are sure to come, so keep an eye out in your home state for new roadway and transportation projects (like light rail) that will zoom your city’s business into the next phase of America’s economic development.

Proceeds derived from the Illinois Tollway’s Build America Bonds issuance will be used as the initial funds to jump start stalled plans for a $6.3-billion rehabilitation program which is currently wallowing in its fifth year. The Illinois Tollway has said that it has sold “all but $250 million of the $3.5 billion in debt it plans to issue in conjunction with this phase of Build America Bonds program.”

Better roads equals increased international demand

“It looks like Build America Bonds got very good demand,” said Jim Kubik. Kubik is the Managing Director of Public Finance at BMO Capital Markets in Chicago. His company has taken the lead on a $53-million Build America Bonds project last week on the campus of Southern Illinois University. “The larger issues will open up demand internationally,” he said. This means that as America’s infrastructure improves its efficiency, the interest of foreign investors in American business should soon increase.

Another company, Fitch Ratings, has revised its debt ratings outlook on the Illinois Tollway project to negative from a previously stable rating. Why is this? It’s because there is a potential for “lower debt-service coverage.” If the tolls the project brings in do not meet the steep projections that have been made – 20 percent above current toll levels over the next 24 months – there will be a steep loss.

This prediction by Fitch comes on the heels of stagnant toll figures. Since the Illinois State Toll Highway Authority relies on “sensitive commercial traffic” for more than 40 percent of its toll revenues, change is clearly needed.

But wait… it’s a toll road. What happened to toll money?

If the Tollroad Authority was designed to be a self sustaining entity which could finance repairs and expansions out of its revenue, why do they have to issue any such bonds? What happened to all the money from the tolls? Was it – or part of it – used to pay for social programs instigated by our misfit elected officials?

In other news, the Illinois National Guard reported a Blogo sighting. Illinois residents are advised not to panic. Apply for short term loans and seek debt relief as normal…

Related Video:

Unemployment in America has reached about nine percent, and there’s no immediate evidence that the climb will slow any time soon. People are looking for the opportunity to make a better life for themselves and their families. Quick payday loans and debt relief have become commonplace, and the tools to improve one’s financial standing are readily available. But steady employment is a key element.

Thus, President Obama’s efforts to bring more Pell Grants and educational opportunities to the unemployed comes at the perfect time. With the Web site Opportunity.gov (www.opportunity.gov), the American people can find some relief and inspiration in their career endeavors.

Training and benefits

The Associated Press (at http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/05/08/obama-offer-help-unemployed/”) reports that Obama wishes to roll out this plan while the jobless retain their unemployment benefits. In addition, the government will indeed pay for the training programs outlined at opportunity.gov. Obama is asking Americans to “commit to at least one year or more of higher education or career training.”

“Our unemployment insurance system should no longer be a safety net, but a steppingstone to a new future,” Obama said. “It should offer folks educational opportunities they wouldn’t otherwise have” and give they needed to “get ahead when the economy comes back.”

The numbers are sobering

The economy lost another 539,000 jobs in April, according to the United States Labor Department. The president acknowledges that it will “take months, maybe even years,” to pull out of the recession.

Yet he remains hopeful. “Although we have a long way to go before we can put this recession behind us, the gears of our economic engine are slowly beginning to turn.” He based this comment on signs of stabilization reported in consumer spending and home sales. Furthermore, the AP notes that construction spending has risen for the first time in six months.

Yet small businesses still lay off employees

President Obama’s $787 billion economic recovery package gave states billions of dollars to extend unemployment benefits by 26 extra weeks for those who want additional job training. Currently, 12 states have expanded benefits. Twenty more should follow soon.

A law that stopped unemployment checks if someone stopped seeking employment and returned to school has been a major stumbling block for Americans. The Obama administration also noted that previously, unemployed workers who return to school may not qualify for Pell Grants that are income based. This will change now. Unemployed workers will be eligible for Pell Grants via Opportunity.gov. Beginning in July 2009, the maximum possible Pell Grant will rise $500, to $5,350.

$200 billion in scholarships and credits

According to the White House, money from the stimulus bill and American Opportunity Tax Credit (provides a $2,500 tax credit for four years of college), would be made permanent. The windfall is expected to provide $200 billion in scholarships and credits for a decade. Moreover, Obama’s proposed 2010 budget will “ensure the Pell Grant continues to grow steadily by making it an entitlement,” say sources.

Big promises for a growing crowd of unemployed

Numbers like 539,000 more jobs lost in April can’t be ignored. That makes the nation’s current unemployment rate 8.9 percent, the highest level since 1983. The number of debt relief applicants is rising; quick payday loans for the employed who are in need are a boon, but only so long as employment is retained. In this economy, there’s no guarantee.

Will Opportunity.gov direct enough people toward the aid they need? Will the money be there? Whatever the case, the change is going to come. Both the Department of Labor and Department of Education have been told by Obama to move forward with the plan. Check out http://www.opportunity.gov to see if there is a program in place to help you in your situation of unemployment. Those who make inquiries for information will be sent a letter to describing available training opportunities and financial aid.

Related Video:

As the automobile giants of America come crashing to the turf, more interest is being paid to how the remaining assets should be redistributed. There was no small controversy recently during the Chrysler bankruptcy negotiations. Debt relief did not come in time and no short term loans could work to save the automaker, so the battle in court began.

President Obama and his administration was critical of the way hedge funds held out on a deal over the Chrysler restructuring. Now, Svea Herbst-Bayliss reports from Boston for Reuters that prominent hedge fund manager Cliff Asness has struck back. He says that the hedge funds “had the right and responsibility to hold out” on the Chrysler LLC restructuring deal.

Their job is to their clients, he says

“Managers have a fiduciary obligation to look after their clients’ money as best they can, not to support the President, nor to oppose him, nor otherwise advance their political views,” said Clifford Asness. Asness is responsible for $20 billion at AQR Capital Management. He made his name in quantitative investing, where computer models select the stocks and bonds for investment.

He wrote his response to Obama in a recent letter in which he speaks out against both Obama forcing Chrysler into bankruptcy protection and how he referred to holdout lenders as “speculators.” In a rare moment of what appeared to be anger, President Obama chided the hedge fund holdouts on the deal for not being willing to make sacrifices as others have during these difficult economic times. Essentially, he’s accusing them of holding out for their own benefit while others in the Chrysler deal are taking a greater loss.

Doing his job in good conscience

Asness’s public response, which has appeared on Wall Street and was obtained by Reuters, has proven to be uncharacteristic of the $1.3 trillion hedge fund industry, which has kept its opinions during these recession bankruptcies much more private. He takes the president to task over what he describes as a “misunderstanding” of exactly what investment managers must do to responsibly serve their clients.

“Let’s be clear, it is the job and obligation of all investment managers, including hedge fund managers, to get their clients the most return they can,” Asness wrote. However,”If they give away their clients’ money to share the ’sacrifice,’ they are stealing.”

Even though Cliff Asness’s firm AQR Capital is not directly involved in the Chrysler LLC bankruptcy negotiations,  he felt he had to speak up because he is “aghast at the President’s comments.”

The courage to speak

Asness voiced his concerns about the consequences of President Obama’s actions, despite what his own clients may think about siding against the nation’s leader.

“It’s really a bad idea to speak out. Angering the President is a mistake and, my views will annoy half my clients,” he predicted. However, “One by one the managers and banks are said to be caving to the President’s wishes out of justifiable fear.”

No taxpayer-funded bailouts here

Cliff Asness’s is a voice amidst the silence in his industry. He stands up for hedge funds and fights the negative talk surrounding them during this recession. He says it is not true that hedge funds have benefited from taxpayer money. They have not sought federal debt relief or short term loans.

“The President screaming that the hedge funds are looking for an unjustified taxpayer-funded bailout is the big lie writ large,” he wrote. “Find me a hedge fund that has been bailed out.”

In closing, Cliff Asness assures that America’s economic system typically repairs itself after a fall: “Most importantly, it is not an owned lackey of the oval office to be scolded for disobedience by the President.”

Related Video:

Make that rusted hulk worth something

A little while back, we talked about President Obama’s plan for the “Cash For Clunkers” program. It appeared to be a promising plan to spur new car sales by enabling car dealerships to take in older cars at better trade value. Better economically, better environmentally in that it promotes getting rid of old, non-green vehicles. A cash advance for and credit repair with Mother Nature, so to speak.

Now Cash For Clunkers is more than an early-stage plan. ABC News’ Jake Tapper and Sunlen Miller report that President Obama held a private meeting with Democratic members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. While working on the ins and out of “cap and trade” environmental legislation, key progress was made on the vehicle trade-in legislation.

Rust buckets for vouchers

Under the newly modified agreement, consumers can trade in any vehicle that gets 18 miles per gallon or less. They’ll receive a voucher for a new, more fuel-efficient car. The amount of the voucher will range from $3,500 to $4,500, depending upon the new vehicle’s fuel efficiency.

“Cash for Clunkers” legislation will likely be folded into a larger Climate Change bill, which sources say is on schedule to pass the House in 2009. The carbon emissions part of the proposal will put a cap on the amount of emissions that will be reduced. Within that cap we will be a market-based system that will generate innovative ways to break America’s carbon-based fuel dependency.

How green is green and other issues

Senator Waxman from California had this to say about meeting some of the key challenges before the Climate Change bill committee:

If we can reach agreement with the coal sector, with the steel, with the auto sector, with the refining sector on our committee which is very representative of the Congress on the whole, then we believe that will be a template for passage in the Senate as well.

Then there are decisions to be made about just how green a car needs to be to receive the credit through the Cash For Clunkers program. “We had to decide how green these cars need to be to get that credit,” Rep. Jay Inslee told reporters.

But the end result should be a win-win. “It’s a good agreement,” agreed former committee chairman Rep. John Dingell. Dingell has been known as a protector of the United States automobile industry, so his endorsement could mean that the last stumbling blocks toward passage will be few.

“It means auto sales, it means fuel efficiency and it means progress.”

Related Video:

Florence Nightingale (image by wikimedia)

Nurses have helped build a healthy America and they deserve our thanks and admiration. From the time Florence Nightingale – “The Lady with the Lamp” – worked to improve the quality of care for patients, nurses have been practitioners of both an art and a science. The level of dedication to helping others must be sizable, the required knowledge base is considerable and the stamina to go on asks everything of a person.

Emergency rooms, private practices, clinics and shelters are the battleground on which staff nurses, nurse practitioners, nurse researchers and educators fight for patient safety. Funding to maintain proper resources has been difficult, more so during a recession than ever. There aren’t enough instant payday loans and installment loans to repay what nurses are worth. They deserve more than a Nurses’ Day 2009, so they got an entire week: National Nurses Week 2009.

Wednesday, May 6 is National Nurses’ Day

It begins then, and concludes on May 12, commemorating the birthday of the founder of modern nursing, Florence Nightingale. American Nurses Association (ANA) President Rebecca Patton
has created a press release that thanks nurses for all that they do and points toward this year’s theme, “Nurses: Building a Healthy America.” She recognizes that through disaster and crisis, today’s nurses must continue to move forward in compassion and build on their nursing education.

At 2.9 million strong, nurses are the largest group of health care workers in the United States, and Patton encourages them all to join the campaign to work for “much-needed reform” in patient care. The week-long celebration is a reminder of both the continuing mission and the need to celebrate how far the profession has come. Patients, their families and the rest of society have benefited from these sterling caregivers.

Rallying to face the challenges

The following are critical areas which Patton feels the ANA and the rest of America’s health care field should refocus their efforts. Working closely with President Obama and his administration, it is my hope (as someone who has depended upon the skill and initiative of nurses during the challenges that came with the birth of my children) that the greater good will be addressed through these issues:

• Establishing staffing levels that promote a safe and healthy working environment for nurses and to ensure the highest possible patient care. To support safe staffing, ANA has launched a national campaign to help fight for safe staffing legislation. To find out more about what you can do to advance safe staffing, please visit www.safestaffingsaveslives.org. This Web site serves as a one-stop source of helpful information with user-friendly tools. On the site, you will be able to find ANA’s “Principles on Safe Staffing,” background research on safe staffing, federal and state legislation and ANA’s legislative and legal action
• ANA favors a restructured health care system that does the following: Enhances consumer access to services by delivering primary health care in community-based settings; Fosters consumer responsibility for personal health, self care, and informed decision making in selecting health care services; Facilitates utilization of the most cost-effective providers and therapeutic options in the most appropriate settings
• The American Nurses Association (ANA) announced its endorsement of President Barack Obama and looks forward to working with the new administration and new lawmakers to affect positive change for nurses and the patients we serve. President Obama believes, as ANA does, that health care is a basic human right, not a privilege. ANA is ready to work with the new administration to provide safe, affordable quality health care for all
• Increasing interest and support for addressing educational preparation for the RN workforce. Evidence shows that higher levels of nursing education are linked with lower patient mortality rates, fewer errors and greater job satisfaction among RNs

The politics of restructuring the American health care system will make achieving all of these aims a great challenge. Determination will be required. Take stock on Nurses’ Week of what the nursing profession has done for you or someone you love. Without the aid of nurses, my wife could have died during our first pregnancy. I know they helped me maintain my composure during those difficult times, too. I am eternally thankful for what caring nurses can accomplish. Are you?

Related Video: