Real Catholics know
The logic in Ross Paradis’ letter to the editor,
The difference is striking and significant. The misquote dwells on the positive, whatever good someone does, not the bad he may have also done to the least of his brothers, which clearly is Jesus’ meaning.
Kennedy’s life was a paradox. His unequivocal support for abortion creates a quandary for his Catholic fans. Certainly, there is no one who is more vulnerable than the unborn. Catholic teaching is clear on this. Paradis’ rewording of Christ’s words serves a diabolical purpose of political deception. Yet, Paradis continues to propagate the charade that Kennedy’s view can still be in synch with Christ’s teachings. They are not nor can they ever be!
Jesus Christ would not support the view of abortion that Ted Kennedy held.
Shamelessly, he uses Kennedy’s death and his misunderstood and exaggerated legacy as a means to pass national health care legislation.
Better care is possible
I was amused by a couple of letters in the BDN the other day. The gentlemen who wrote them were against health care reform but wondered why the average citizen doesn’t have the same coverage that Congress does. It’s possible. We could have basically the same coverage if we pass health reform.
All federal employees — not just Congress — have the same health benefits program, which is available through an exchange. Anyone who’s paying attention to the debate on health care reform knows that this is the same type of exchange President Obama wants to establish for all Americans: public option, — a government-run health insurance policy that would be offered along with private policies in the newly-created health insurance exchanges.
As to the gentlemen not wanting “socialism,” I advise them to give up their Medicare and Social Security, for they are “socialized” programs.
Let’s face facts. Republicans don’t support health care reform. They’re not looking for a deal, or concessions, or enticements. They’re looking to kill the bill and capitalize on its failure. Period.
Let’s move forward
Most people would agree that some degree of health care reform would be a good idea, but there is much less agreement on how much reform is enough. I would like to suggest that taking small bites would be more productive than the 1,300-page bill approach. I would also like to recommend that we begin with the following simple and reachable goals that will foster consensus and move us forward to a productive and sustainable health care system.
Tort reform: It is time that we allow doctors to practice preventive medicine rather than forcing them to practice defensive medicine. Many unnecessary tests are done because of the constant threat of lawsuits. Reform in this area is the quickest and easiest way to lower the cost of health care.
Deregulation of the insurance industry to allow individuals and groups to purchase across state lines, which will bring the cost of health insurance down, especially here in Maine — making it more affordable for both individuals and businesses.
Allow and promote more use of health savings accounts which would put decision-making in the hands of the doctor and patient, rather than the government.
Decrease the administrative and bureaucratic overhead in Medicare and Medicaid so the funds can be used for treatment, rather than paperwork.
Let’s move forward and do something sensible to improve our health care and reduce its costs.
How sad. At a time where there are real, deep needs demanding our attention, Maine will be saddled with a costly, divisive people’s veto battle over the issue of marriage equality. Out-of-state entities will flood our airwaves with expensive television advertising spreading misinformation about this issue when those funds could be better spent to ensure safe housing and hot meals for our elderly poor, retraining programs for those out of work or protection of educational programs in danger of elimination.
I urge you to vote early and vote No on 1. Let’s get back to the real work of helping those in need in these tough times.
David E. Brass
A recent BDN letter writer complained bitterly about the lack of a cost of living, or COLA, increase in Social Security. The writer blames this on Obama, AARP, Democrats, the press and government in general.
I assume the BDN and most Social Security beneficiaries know COLA increases are based on Social Security laws that make increases according to the state of the economy. The publication of letters like this do not add to the discussion of our country’s problems, and show that a lot of people don’t know what they’re talking about. Should the editorial pages be enablers of that kind of misinformation?
When no means yes
Once again, the Secretary of State’s office has worded a ballot question so that “no” means “yes” and “yes” means “no.” The question in most voters’ minds is, “Do you or do you not want same-sex marriage in Maine?”
Asking a negative question, such as “Do you want to repeal an amendment?” guarantees thousands of yes votes from confused voters. I hope this is not being done to get a desired result.
The question could be, “Should the recently passed amendment for same-sex marriage remain valid?”