Imagine

What would it be like if companies paid their workers as much as they could rather than as little as they can? This is a big step past Capitalism 101 but it is still free market. It just places a higher value on the well-being of the worker than on corporate wealth or some hedge fund manager who contributes nothing. It is also a patriotic position because it values the good of the nation above personal wealth. We tend to think of capitalism as getting the most you can get for as little as you can but there is no rule that mandates that. Valuing the lives and well-being of employees is not socialism in any sense of the word. It is just taking care of your workers in a way that allows them to have meaningful lives free from financial hardship. It is all about your value system. If you think this is crazy then consider this. Dan Price who founded Gravity Systems in Washington recently took a pay cut from $1,000,000 per year to $70,000 per year to help fund a pay raise for his employees that lifted them from about $48,000 per year to $70,000 per year. The boss will be making the same as the employees. Oh, sure. No doubt he has equity in the company and other investments but the gesture he makes is dramatic.

By comparison it is estimated that companies based in the United States are sitting on two trillion dollars in cash that they are desperately holding on to praying for a political climate to emerge that will allow them to keep this money with a lower tax burden. This is money that the free market people tell us is to be used to “create jobs and employ workers.” Right now all it is doing is sitting in money funds that attempt to offset inflation which is very low at this time. If those companies were as patriotic as Mr. Price they could raise the compensation packages for millions of workers who could pay taxes and fund the rebuilding of the infrastructure that buttresses our economy. But that would require thinking more of their workers and the welfare of the United States than the multi-million dollar compensation packages and golden parachutes that have created an oligarchy. An oligarchy that is self perpetuating by its ability to buy elections and lobbyists to direct favorable legislation.

Into this toxic brew comes Dan Price, entrepreneur and millionaire, who shows his appreciation for the workers by putting his money where his mouth is. No claims of being a self made man or libertarian concepts to justify keeping it all. Can anyone argue that it is beneficial to his workers to receive a greater portion of the fruits of their labor? Is there any dispute that the distribution of higher wages will have a stimulative effect on the local economy and help create a secure future for the just recipients of this event? These people talk of starting a family or being able to rent or purchase a place of their own. What they speak of is what we used to call the American Dream, the dream that is dying a slow and painful death.

In truth, these are the things that we speak of when we refer to the greatness of America and the love that people have for their home. So, how can Mr. Dan Price be wrong? Or could we hold him up as a classic example of the good that exists in the hearts of some people? Could he be an example of the selflessness that we so treasure in others but find so rarely in the hearts of the Captains of Finance and Industry? And if we find it so valuable and pleasurable then should we not encourage people to emulate the example for the good of the people and the good of the country? Dan Price could just as easily found a good hedge fund manager that would have used the money to finance arcane instruments that are little more than legalized gambling, making bets on what institution will fail at their endeavor. In the end his money could have been used for no good end or for creation of anything other than more wealth. But it was not used for no good end, it was used for a very excellent end and that was to improve the lives of the people who worked to generate it.

I saw a graphic the other day that showed that there are 80 people, less than 100 people, in the world that control more wealth than the bottom 50% of all humanity on the globe. Pause just a moment to allow that to sink in. That half is about 4 billion people compared to 80. And we now have representatives of those people hard at work to influence legislators to allow them to take more.

I am a capitalist. I believe that allowing people to create and keep the profits from the products of their creation is necessary to motivate economic prosperity. I don't say growth because I don't think that infinite growth is possible. At some point we have to move to sustainability. Capitalism is our economic model but it is far from perfect and that is the role of regulation. Without regulation to benefit the rest of society capitalism is avaricious. There has to be regulation or all of the wealth ends up in the hands of a very few.

I am also a socialist. I firmly believe in the value of social programs such as Medicare, Social Security and, yes, Obamacare. I believe in a tax system that funds the essential services that only government can deliver and make available to all. I believe that here in our country we are all in league together and that means not allowing the least of us to do without.

I imagine that at this time there are millionaires everywhere who are saying, “Oh crap, look what that Dan Price has done. He's going to get everyone stirred up and now they are going to expect us to do be good to our workers and spend our money.”

My Take on this is that we need to put up a monument to this guy. Not only has he shown that private enterprise can have a heart but he showed us where his is. It is also My Take that if we had more Dan Prices that unions would not be necessary.

Water, water, where?

When I was a kid, ten or so, Dad would take Mom to the A&P store about once a month to do the supermarket shopping. The rest of the time we did our shopping at Sandidge's at Eubank but there were just some things at the A&P that Sandidge's didn't carry. I have stopped several times to look at that building, now gone, and have marveled at how much larger it was in the eyes of my memory. It was HUGE and had so much stuff in it. I have always been a boy and now a man that seriously loves to eat. Food is one of my major loves. Seeing all those choices just made my mouth water but what enthralled me the most was lettuce. I love lettuce. Salads are very high on my list. I am probably the only person in the world that can gain weight eating salads. Lettuce at that time was a rarity out of season. In season, which was dreadfully short, one had the black seeded Simpson that could be made into a delectable delight with some green onions and bacon grease. That was before we knew that stuff would make your blood ooze through your arteries rather than flow. Dang it was good!

If the budget allowed it Mom would buy one head of lettuce on our trip to the A&P and I would be ecstatic. I could never persuade her to buy more of it because it just was not practical enough. The same went for Miracle Whip. She would never buy the name brand and always bought the store brand. What it the world was that name? I swore to her that when I grew up there would always be lettuce and Miracle Whip in the fridge and so it has been.

Now, I can make a sandwich without Miracle Whip if I have mustard but without lettuce to give a sandwich that crunch it is just something to fill the hole in one's stomach. With lettuce it becomes something much more exotic. But those were different times and the interstate highway system and interstate commerce are so much more developed that those garden delights that once were only available in season are now available the year around. The presence of those fresh vegetables have become so ubiquitous that we take them for granted. Would you like some spaghetti squash in January? No problem. Cucumbers for Christmas? Just put it on the list. We all know that nothing beats the taste of a garden tomato but in the dark of winter we will be very accepting of one that is tasteless and hard as a brick. Back when I discovered gardening as a joy rather than a chore broccoli was practically unknown in these parts. I'm pretty sure that I was growing it before it ever showed up in the supermarket. Having lived the urbane lifestyle while in Lexington I had discovered it and developed quite a fondness for it. I also found that there were several other delights that it was possible to grow in the home garden and that changed the whole face of gardening for me.

Most people never think about where that stuff comes from or how it gets here but that is about to change. Governor Brown in California just issued restrictions on water usage that is to cut the volume by 25%. That is the water that grows the lettuce and broccoli that graces your table. The Central Valley in California supplies a very large percentage of the fresh vegetables in the produce aisle at Kroger. In California the reservoirs are at a fraction of their volume and the snow pack that provides water all year long is less than 15% of normal. Many farmers have already taken ground out of production to save water for other crops. The almond industry is one of California's largest exporters but it takes 200 gallons of water to produce a pound of almonds. Farmers are pumping water from the aquifers but they have pumped so much that the ground is subsiding. Well drillers are scheduled out weeks and months ahead because they no sooner drill a well than they have to come back and deepen it because the aquifer has receded.

Climatologists say this is the worst drought in at least 150 years, maybe 500 years. Some negative nannies say we are facing a drought in the Southwest not seen for a millennia
or more. I'm sure you've noticed that beef prices are through the roof. My family has cut beef consumption to the point that we now consider it a luxury item and will agonize for hours over how to cook it without messing it up. Remember “Beef, it's what's for dinner?” Well, no it's not. The reason for the price uptick is drought conditions that have forced the large beef ranches to cut the herd to hold down feed costs. This results in a tighter market and the free market says that is what causes prices to rise. But we have coped with not having beef as a common meal. We still have chickens and pigs and I really love vegetables so life is still good. I went to Kroger a couple of days ago and got about $40 worth of fresh produce. But what happens when that $40 becomes $80? There will be hard choices to make.

When I was a kid we always canned green beans and tomatoes. We always stored potatoes in some cool place but it was inevitable that sometime after the New Year they would become wrinkled and rubbery. That is something one can live with but we haven't for a while. We still can a lot of beans and tomatoes but we don't even have a good place to store potatoes.

Times are a-changing. Resources are stretched thinner, people are more abundant and the family farm is nearing extinction. The climate is changing, you can blame whatever you want but your stomach won't care. With water food can be grown, without water it can't. Doesn't it seem like a good idea to seek solutions before need and want set in or will our slavish obedience to the free market allow people to begin starving to decrease demand? We can already reclaim waste water to a drinkable purity. It may seem gross but running out of water is worse. I'm not even going to go on about global warming because the fact is that the associated costs are coming due with it or without it.

My Take is this. If lettuce goes to $3 a head I will have to make a hard decision. I'd rather not do that.

Policy plus Relief

Tricia Neal's column in the Sunday paper was quite good in revealing the emotions that can surround us when a desperate issue facing our fellow humans is brought into our sphere of awareness. The reporting on the cardboard village peopled by students in order to raise awareness was also purposeful in that for a brief time it made it just a little harder to ignore that there are people hidden from our sight who daily run the risk of not seeing tomorrow. People who are normally outside the normal community structures that provide physical and emotional support that enables us to have a lifestyle that is free from fear of hunger or fear of being subject to the elements or fear that some medical issue that would be a minor inconvenience to us may become a life threatening illness to them. We picture these people as living under bridges or in cardboard campgrounds and all that is true but there are many more who leave an impression of normality when medical, nutritional and emotional insecurity are a way of life. People who gain access to what we think of as basic requirements outside the normal systems that most people have to ensure that they do not fall through the cracks and disappear. The fact is that many more of our brothers and sisters than we realize are barely hanging on. Many more are a paycheck or two away from that fate and this is either ignored or, as is often the case, blamed on their own failures and lack of industriousness.

The report in the paper said that the cardboard village project hoped to raise $10,000 for Somerset Community Mission to help them with their wonderful calling to serve the least of us. It is a very admirable project just as is God's Food Pantry and the numerous other private agencies that have sprung up to meet the desperate need. These entities can never have enough resources to provide for their clients needs because their needs go beyond food, medicine and bedding. Their needs extend to once again including them in our society as useful and valuable members. Should it ever be acceptable for us to ignore our fellows for any of these reasons? I think not. I am not so delusional as to think that each and every person can be given a life free from want but I am also not so delusional so as to think that we are doing anything close to what we can to alleviate the needs.

We have a perception problem of what the causes are of poverty and homelessness and it results in mistaken solutions. While the immediate needs mentioned must be addressed there also must be solutions that reach over the longer term with the goal of eradicating poverty and homelessness. You say it can't be done? I say it can.

What I would like to see is for these efforts of our kids and Somerset Community Mission and all the others who try to fill the gap result in larger efforts to change the governmental policies that hold the real solutions over the long term. What I would like to see are people coming together to be educated on the root causes of these things and trying to create solutions that would result in long term and permanent change. Relief is wonderful and doing it is at the heart of every faith that we have but the ideal must be to eliminate the need. Scripture says “the poor are with us always” and that is likely true but being poor is a relative thing. In a society that is so rich, just as Tricia realizes, there is no need for so many to live outside of the protection of society's structures. This is where the real service can be used and our children can be taught how to be effective in running their own government. Maybe us old fogies could learn a thing or two ourselves. So, the real question is twofold. Do we want to do it and how can it be done? Let's face it. There are a lot of folks who just don't want to do it. Those unfortunate people we are talking about are out of sight, out of mind. We can give to the offering at church and donate to God's Food Pantry and we feel all better about ourselves. I still have not become so cynical that I don't believe that we can do better. We can because we must.

What needs to be done? Policy. This means that we need to be able to change government policy independent of political ideology. In political speak that is “reaching across the aisle.” There are any number of studies that indicate that if we invest in solutions to prevent catastrophes that we will save money in the long run dealing with emergencies. Some people are just afraid that we will give something to someone that hasn't been earned. Keep in mind, that is not the focus. The focus is long term savings and gaining productive citizens. One of the projects that is being tried, successfully I might add, is providing housing to homeless people before requiring that they have a job. Those who have tried this have found that emergency medical expenses have fallen dramatically just by doing this. In addition, those people gain enough security to be able to work and be productive even if they don't cover all of the costs of the housing. Society still realizes a savings because of the decrease in other categories.

Another part of policy that needs to be addressed is short-sightedness. We have been guilty of not giving projects enough time to become profitable. And, while we are at it we should redefine exactly what profitable is. It may not be a matter of dollars and cents. We need to be able to see ten or twenty years down the road.

I am happy to say that as far as medical care goes we have begun the journey with the Affordable Care Act. I am acutely aware this is a contentious subject and I will freely admit that there are kinks that need to be worked out but emergency rooms are seeing dramatic reductions in patients that cannot pay. What this should do, if those savings are passed on to consumers (which is by no means certain) is reduce hospital charges and lower insurance rates. That is simple capitalism.

I strongly urge kids, young people, to become engaged in the political process. I can assure you that you can make enough noise to be heard. Become educated, educate those around you. I would like to see adults throw off the cynicism and be optimistic again that we can have a more egalitarian society.

My Take is this. It can be done. Cynicism is the way of the past and has nothing to do with youth. The youth have taken up causes before and managed to change the way things are done. Go for it.

Just Put It On the Line

The almost proposed annexation by Burnside of the Lake Cumberland shoreline around to Pulaski County Park for the express purposes of allowing alcohol sales for special events has created quite a furor. As could be expected the anti-alcohol sales crowd vociferously opposes such an effort in keeping with long-held tradition of prohibition. A meeting was held last week to allow citizens to voice their preferences and it was a sell-out with people from all over the county taking part. Judge-Executive Steve Kelly spoke to the crowd reiterating his opposition to alcohol sales but then he seemed to favor them as a means of funding an endangered budget. I have not had much to be concerned with about the new Judge-Executive but I find something here to disagree with but it is not with him alone. It is with nearly the entire fiscal court and some of the other officers of county government.

A few issues are at play here. One is Somerset's declared intention to take its share of the occupational tax to fund city projects which leaves perhaps a $4,000,000 hole in the county's budget. Now, I want to be clear that the city is well within its rights to take this money. In the past it had been allowed to accrue to the county for industrial development and other efforts that the city and county jointly pursued. From what I understand the city says it has not received its money's worth and proposes to undertake those missions itself. I think I am correct on that but correct me if I am in error.

The other issue is the hole in the county budget and the attempts to bring the economic development of the county proper more in line with the development efforts of Somerset and Burnside. The biggest thing the county has to offer is tourism but it lacks ways to take advantage of that industry to generate income. The proposal for Pulaski County Park would be one way to access the profitability generated by Lake Cumberland.

Finally, there is the process of annexation that circumvents the will of the people and allows annexation of public rights-of-way in order to be able to extend city services to distant areas. In this case, sales of alcohol. I am on record as opposing this strange way to accomplish annexation. It just does not make any kind of sense in the administration of public affairs.

I do not oppose sales of alcohol anywhere and I view it as prohibition and restraint of trade but from the viewpoint of public administration the people have the final say here. That brings me to one of the points which is economic development of the county's resources. As I said earlier, Judge-Executive Kelly opposes alcohol sales but approves of the revenue they generate. Well, you can't have it both ways. One of my pet peeves about politicians is their unwillingness to place their jobs on the line to stand for something. If the Judge-Executive wants to raise the revenue then he needs to propose ways to raise it. If he can't go along with the alcohol sales he needs to accept the results. The same goes for fiscal court and the voters at large. If the court and interested parties want to allow those sales then go to the voters and make the case. Put some political capital on the line and risk losing that taxpayer funded job. If it is good for the county then stand up. If the will of the people is avoided there will be a price to pay. Both Somerset and Burnside have approved sales and they are reaping the rewards of that boldness.

If Pulaski County residents desire to continue the level of services that they receive then the people and their elected representatives need to bite the bullet and accept solutions. Make the case for higher taxes. That is where revenue comes from. I point to the example of Burnside which has been able to fund services without raising taxes to its residents. If Pulaski County wants to exist without the many services provided then don't give government enough to operate. This is not a hard thing to understand. Now, a lot of people will go on about governmental waste and high salaries but that is, for the most part, not true. Over the past several years, especially since the Great Recession, governments have cut budgets to the bone, often to the detriment of its citizens and that needs to stop.

On the other hand, the Great Recession has been hard on the average wage earner in Pulaski County. While taxes are the lifeblood of governmental services there are other ways to generate that revenue and that is by encouraging industries, chiefly tourism in our case, to better access the wealth that tourists bring to our area. Only a fraction of that potential is being tapped at present. Our area has the potential to become a local Gatlinburg with water instead of mountains. If you have been to Gatlinburg then you have seen how tourism has been harnessed there. It can be done here. Even Burnside, the only town on Lake Cumberland, has not even begun to tap that unrealized potential.

Somerset needs to annex to the lake wherever Burnside has left a shoreline to be claimed and provide services and opportunities to those residents. Lake Cumberland is the most available resource we have. The case needs to be made to the voters for areas of Pulaski County adjacent to the lake to be opened for tourism development. We just can't continue to elect representatives who seek to avoid tough decisions that would benefit large numbers of people.

News yesterday told of the new Marriott Hotel to be built adjacent to the Center for Rural Development. This adds another piece to the vision of Congressman Rogers for which he took a lot of heat from some who called it a boondoggle. It is further evidence of the vision of Somerset to boldly push into the future. The county leaders need to follow the example.

Justice Denied, Justice Belied

The report just completed by the Justice Department has declined to file charges against Officer Darrin Wilson in the death of Michael Brown. I don't think that surprises anyone because the level of proof required to assert that Officer Wilson killed Brown as a result of racial bias is pretty high. However, what the report did deliver was a damning indictment of police practices in Ferguson, Missouri that indicate a long held institutional bias in the police force. Now, there will be a lot of folks that will just not see it that way and will accuse the Justice Department under Attorney General Eric Holder of being biased itself. I don't believe that the Justice Department is biased but I do believe that policing practices are in dire need of realignment in order to reassert the duty of the police to be servants of the community. In an interview a representative of the Fraternal Order of Police who served on the commission pointed out something that many may consider unimportant but it is a failing that underlies the financial support of police activities.

The report pointed out how the police department in Ferguson had become dependent on fines and court ordered costs to finance the operations of the police. For instance, a person could be fined for a taillight out and be unable to pay the fine. The courts would assess court costs and more fines for failure to pay and the amount due would continue to increase placing undue stress on a family already having difficulty making ends meet. In addition, being required to show up in court takes time and will often place a person's job in jeopardy. The costs can escalate to hundreds or even thousands of dollars and have no comparison to the original fine. The FOP representative said that this practice began to take wing when state and federal dollars for local police began to dry up after the Great Recession. This abomination that was foisted on the American people has had many unseen costs to our society and this is one that impacts citizens that are very often the least able to pay or obtain adequate representation. It is a revenue stream that does not cause negative feedback from sufficient numbers of voters but which perverts the role of law enforcement.

With this model the police are encouraged to write tickets to generate revenue. This was confirmed by messages from the financial offices to the police command in Ferguson. That it is a commonplace method used by police forces everywhere is in little doubt. I myself have been cited for causes that were improper. In one case the officer even admitted that I had not actually committed the offense and wrote the citation anyway. If I had not had knowledge of how the system operates AND had representation I would have been required to pay the fine. In many cases people just find it more convenient to pay the fine than appear in court. In many more cases the alleged offender just goes to court and takes whatever is meted out because he or she is ignorant of how the system works. I am also personally aware of instances where fines have been levied and when the person can't pay that person is either fined more or given court costs which further increase the likelihood of failure to pay and the cycle repeats. I even know of alleged offenders who have been incarcerated because of failure to pay and that only generates more costs since, in many ways, we charge people to be locked up. The original offense is not subject to incarceration but failure to pay is. Our jails are full but not only because supposedly crime is worse but in order to generate income to support those institutions.

Often these are the dregs of society and so they command little compassion. It is unfortunate that we care so little about these people that we can't generate compassion for their plight. After all, they brought it on themselves. They deserve whatever they get. What is most unfortunate is that it allows justice to be perverted and people become inured to it. After all, it happens to someone else. But justice denied is justice belied and all of us suffer for it. When our system that is supposed to mete out justice to all is applied differently to some than it is to others then we are all complicit in the perversion. The worst perversion is to ourselves when we allow our moral compass to drift off true north because we know how or have the resources to work the system. Or because we know that the people that matter to us will be little affected.

This is what the Justice Department report uncovered in Ferguson. Heaven help us, it could have been us or any other local jurisdiction. If there was a racial component to the bias in Ferguson it was due to African Americans often occupying the strata of society with the least resources. However, in at least one instance there was verifiable proof of racial jokes and statements. When these things are allowed to persist in any governmental institution they are like a cancer that eats away at the respect that all citizens are due.

I want to make it clear that I am not singling out police. This is something that permeates the entire law enforcement structure right up through the responsible judicial entities. And it is not just in Ferguson, it is everywhere.

My Take is this. It does not have to be this way. Justice for all can sit at the very top of our governmental system just as it should. How? First, fund law enforcement and courts independently of the fees they generate to remove the profit motive. That is what taxes are for. Second, emphasize the community as the focal point of police service, become a part of that community. Third, never allow bias and discrimination of any sort to enter into loose office talk or in any other aspect of service to the people. I admit to sometimes being cynical having experienced so much of it in daily life but, as the saying goes, hope springs eternal. Without hope we have nothing.

American Exceptionalism

News is that Oklahoma, in a supposed rebuff to the Common Core curriculum, is proposing making it illegal for state high schools to offer Advanced Placement courses. The thinking here is that the federal government is too involved in deciding what should be considered for such courses and that means that the federal government is meddling too much in what should be state and local issues. In addition, the complaint is that Advanced Placement courses don't place enough emphasis on “American Exceptionalism.” For those unfamiliar with the term American Exceptionalism is a theory that the United States occupies a space that is different and superior to other nations. The term has been used by conservative writers and policy makers to lend credence to American intervention in global disputes. No one disputes the right of the United States to intervene in issues that affect its national interests but to even imply that we have some inherent right to do so because of some superior endowment is just plain hubris.

When I was a kid (and that was a bit longer ago than I like to admit) my Dad taught me that there was no one else any better than me. At the same time he taught that I should not act as though I was any better than anyone else either. I would bet good money that well over 90% of you were taught the same lessons. My teachers (my Mother included) were people that had endured The Great Depression and World War II. Life lessons had taught them quite a lot about living in a society that had seen desperate times from allowing the elite of society to grow into an entitled class. World War II taught them that it could all disappear and that any one of them could be required to sacrifice for the well being of the whole. Lessons that we seem to have forgotten. We have once again allowed a privileged class to rise to great positions of power. Levels that exceed even those of that long ago Gilded Age. Now we can go to war without requiring sacrifice from the public, indeed, without even paying for it. Just put it on the credit card. There will be no suffering required. Now, just how exceptional is that? It is pretty exceptional but not in a good way.

The idea of using American Exceptionalism to justify foreign adventures reminds me of nothing so much as Manifest Destiny. You may recall that doctrine from high school American History as being the doctrine that allowed us to drive across the continent in a wave that took land from the native Americans. It held that if it were not manifest that God wanted this we would not be able to do it. The depredations and misdeeds done in the name of Manifest Destiny have come more to light since my high school days and one must acknowledge that great harm was done. Shall we ever be able to rectify those misdeeds? Not likely but at least the new doctrine of American Exceptionalism will allow those we conquered to live in an exceptional nation.

Personally, I think we do live in an exceptional country. In the 240 years since our independence we have done many worthwhile things along with some not so worthwhile. What is exceptional about our country are the ideals upon which it was founded and that bear so much tending in order to sustain. We have not always been faithful. But to assert that we have some right to press our culture and belief on some other country is being untrue to that heritage. Truthfully, a nation cannot be exceptional unless its people are exceptional.

While it is possible for us to live in an exceptional country it does not necessarily follow that we are exceptional and others are not. Great empires have risen to be exceptional but have fallen when that sense of exceptionalism gave way to a sense of privilege and the benefits that arose from that status were not shared with the multitudes. It is a given that people with great privilege will attempt to keep that status proprietary and not share it and that is not exceptional.

To assert that such a thing as American Exceptionalism would give the United States the right to go about attempting to dictate a way of life to others and to bend the world to our whim is hubris befitting the gods and that hubris is what always brought them to their downfall. If we continue to assert American Exceptionalism it will one day be our downfall also. If we look about the world over the past fifty years there is no shortage of adventures in which we attempted to mold countries and people to fit our perceptions and values but when we do that we automatically devalue what they hold dear about their own countries and ways of life.

But a doctrine of “American Exceptionalism” carries with it a connotation of some divine right having been bestowed upon us just as we once asserted of “Manifest Destiny.” It is dangerous to allow ourselves to become what we believe to be heirs of some divine or inevitable gift because then what we do in the name of that gift we must also attribute that worthiness. Do we dare assert that? Is there an empire that has ever risen that did not assert that?

My Take is that exceptionalism is as exceptionalism does (to paraphrase a great philosopher). If we are to be remembered by history as being and exceptional nation then we must attempt to provide an environment in which the values that we treasure can come to fruition. We must allow that not all peoples follow the waves of history on the same timetable but perhaps by our example we can be the exceptional nation that is admired globally and that others may wish to emulate. To do so we will have to tame our own appetites and be more willing to engage with reason and patience. We will never achieve that American Exceptionalism by dint of power and force but only by being able to carry our core values that assert the power of the people through the ages.

Open Letter to the Governor

 I am sending this to the governor as an open letter.  I will also forward it to newspapers in the hope that it may jar something in state bureaucracy loose and get our daughter some help.

The Honorable Governor Steve Beshear

700 Capitol Avenue, Suite 100
Frankfort, Kentucky 40601

Dear Governor Beshear:

I am writing this letter to you because I just can't think of any other route to take. You are proud, and justifiably so, of linking Kentucky to the Affordable Care Act and that makes you in charge. I hope you have some answers.

I read the article the other day about how great KyNect has been for Kentucky and how the percentage of Kentuckians who were uninsured has dropped dramatically. It is one of the few promising things that shows our state in a positive light and I commend you on your willingness to make Kentucky and her residents some of the first to take advantage of this great deal.

I have one question. If you have insurance but the managed care company that administers KyNect won't approve treatment do you really have insurance?

Last Friday we called to have my daughter, who is now 49, taken to the hospital because of chest pain. She has been suffering from chronic and progressive back pain since her early twenties and has been through a litany of doctors and procedures. The emergency room at the local hospital said that, yes, her heartbeat was erratic but that was because of the intense pain. Then they sent her home without any kind of care whatsoever saying that her managed care company would not approve it.

Just a few months ago she was scheduled for surgery on her cervical spine. Nerve compression is causing her to lose the use of her arms and causes very bad headaches. Her doctor had jumped through all the hoops demanded by the managed care company, the surgery had been scheduled and the operating room reserved when one more hoop was demanded. She missed that reservation and her doctor dropped all Medicaid patients. He said that the managed care companies would no longer allow him to treat patients according to their best interests. This from a doctor trained and regarded as one of the best spinal surgeons we have. Now she is still waiting, trying to find a doctor that will even see her. They see a woman that is suffering so much that they think it will be impossible to make it profitable. Those that have the ability to help with her pain are in so much fear from the draconian laws concerning opiates that they choose not to treat to avoid the overzealous enforcement of the drug police. All those laws have done is make it harder for those who need those drugs to get them while creating an epidemic of heroin abuse and death.

So, how does KyNect reach out and serve my daughter? Again, If you have insurance but the managed care company that administers KyNect won't approve treatment do you really have insurance?

Even now the lower spine issues will not permit her to walk. She is confined to a wheelchair when she has to go to the bathroom or anything else. We know this does not have to be this way. We have seen her more functional and, while never without pain, be able to have rudimentary ability to care for herself. She has become so cynical about our health care providers that she says, “if you are poor you just don't count.” I want to believe we are better than that but evidence indicates she is right. It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that the only way that managed care companies can save money for Medicaid is by denying care to those who need it.

On the other hand, there are those who have other challenges for whom we actually pay people to advocate. They will ensure that those people who need support receive all the benefits that are available to them. What makes my daughter any less deserving of those benefits and that assistance? She exists on a small disability check (and I mean small) and a meager allotment of food stamps. By the middle of the month she is broke and scraping the bottom of the larder and all this while dealing with more pain that either you or I can imagine.

So, Governor. How can KyNect be of service to her. We would appreciate any suggestions because we have beat our heads against the wall of denial for so long we are at a loss for any way to proceed. From where we sit it appears she is right. Poor people don't count.

I don't mean this to be an academic question. I want to know what to do to help my daughter. I am eagerly awaiting your response. In the meantime I am sending this as an open letter in the hope that answers can be forthcoming.

Sincerely

Robert F. Moore