Why I am not a Democrat.... or a Republican.

Though the Democrats generally tend to lean towards my values as a Christian, I cannot call myself a Democrat. But that doesn't make me a Republican either. Nor any other political party. What occurred in the past few days in regards to the Farm Bill and the Fairness Amendment is a perfect example of why that is. If representatives of congress were free from political pressure to vote their conscience, the Fairness in Farm and Food Policy Amendment should have passed. Instead, the amendment failed with a vote of 117 to 309 (see if your rep dropped the ball here). Note this bit from an LA Times article before the voting began:

"This is the biggest change we've had in payment limits ever," said Peterson. He said that "wheat, cotton and rice are not in support" of the change and that neither were many of his committee members. Nine of them are freshmen Democrats who defeated Republicans in rural districts. Pelosi and other Democratic leaders have made protecting those Democrats a priority to ensure that they keep their seats.

In the past, Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) had supported similar measures introduced by Kind.

"We have pushed them beyond where they feel comfortable," Peterson said of the freshmen as he explained why he would oppose any move to further lower the cap on subsidy payments. "Their constituencies do not support what we have done." Advocates who expected Pelosi to push for deeper reform were frustrated.

That's putting it lightly. As I heard one advocate say: "What's the point of getting the Dems reelected if they don't change anything?" I'm amazed that our political system works as well as it does! The thing is, though, that so many Christians allow themselves to be lured in by one side or the other. We all know about the Religious Right and how so many Christians in America identify themselves with the Republican party. But the "Religious Left" is not the proper answer. As a Christian, my core identity is found in Christ. I am certainly concerned that the government acts in accordance with my moral values (particularly protecting the disadvantaged of society), but we ought to watch out for that sweet, addictive drug they call "political power." We ought not get duped into thinking that some political party, or government for that matter, is the embodiment of Christ on earth. They merely have their power on lease from God, and we need to make sure they understand that.

That is why I may be disappointed in the outcome of the vote yesterday, but I do not feel that my efforts were wasted. It is not a waste to do what is right. It is not a waste to speak truth to power, even if power wins in the short term. Of course, we can see some "practical" benefits. We know that we've made some progress, we've had good press coverage, we got some baby steps in reform, and tons of new advocates found their first opportunity to raise their voice. And this round is not even over: there is still the Senate bill to think of and then the conference to reconcile to the Senate and House versions. These practical points are important for organizations like Bread, so they can keep their steam going. But ultimately we do this because we are standing up in our biblical concern for justice and we need to make our voices heard, even if they are not heeded.

Today, one of the things about Bread for the World that I am grateful for is that one key word they emphasize: nonpartisan.

Article spotlight: Washington Post

There is a brief, but good piece in the Washington Post from Saturday, written by the president of the Capital Area Food Bank, entitled "School's Out, But Hunger Isn't Taking A Break":

While the summer offers many children a chance to live free of care and to indulge in a world of fantasy and make-believe ["A Kid's Reality," Metro, June 26], for more than 200,000 children in the Washington area, life becomes not so easy and the enjoyment of summer is overshadowed by a lack of food.

The summer presents us all with challenges on how to guarantee that children and families at risk of hunger have access to nutritious food and three quality meals each day.

Interview with Robert Egger in Washington Post

From the intro to the article:

Robert Egger, much-lauded founder of D.C. Central Kitchen and longtime revolutionary in the war against hunger, recently won the food industry's Duke Zeibert Capital Achievement Award for his humanitarian work.

He says some interesting things. Check it out.

Sicko: the "softer" side of Moore

“But behind it all, we need to realize that if we say we're a Christian nation, providing health care for every American is the Christian thing to do,” concludes Moore, a Catholic who embarked on his quest for social justice after opting not to become a priest.

“I don't know why we call a Christian act socialism. I think Jesus would want for every one of us to take care of human beings and guarantee it for everyone.”

~from Pasadena Weekly article

So this isn't directly related to hunger issues, but it is related to poverty. And I went to see it with my internship supervisor (who was a friend long before he was a supervisor, by the way). The above quote was not in the movie, but was a comment made at the unorthodox and barely-media-covered premiere of the film in Los Angeles' "Skid Row." One news source with representation at the event was the Pasadena Weekly, which has an interesting article on it (including some descriptions of what's in the movie).

I'll be honest, I'm not the biggest Michael Moore fan. Truth be told, I was quite surprised to find out from the aforementioned article that Moore is a Christian. It was not his politics that led me to think otherwise, but his frequently abrasive demeanor. On the other hand, Christians are well known for their abrasive demeanors, so go figure. This film, however, was the best Moore film yet, in my humble opinion (the others being Roger & Me, Bowling for Columbine, and Fahrenheit 9/11). The reason? Moore got out of the way a little bit and let other people talk for themselves. Also, he spent a significant amount of time focusing on positive messages rather than ranting attacks. He does make some jabs and his biting humor is completely present, of course, but it's somewhat toned down.

As a former worker in the health insurance industry myself, I would first just like to mention what I see as the biggest con of the movie, which is that his examples are obviously showing only one side of the story. I can't speak to how well the positive examples from other countries (Canada, UK, France, Cuba) portray their systems (though I have my suspicions). For the American system, however, I know that there is information that we're not hearing. When I answered phone calls for a Medicare HMO plan, most of the errors were either misunderstandings by the callers/members ( and granted, the plans are complicated) or unintentional clerical or processing errors. I also processed claims, so I had an understanding of why things got denied.

There were a few rare occasions in which I had no personal knowledge of why something was denied. That was when authorizations were reviewed by the medical director. But these denials had explanations: for example, further inpatient days at the acute level of care were denied because the patient was not making any progress according to the reports of hospital doctors. I can't say whether there was some kind of medical director conspiracy of the kind that Moore documents, since I was lower on the totem pole, but I will say that even if a possibility existed for such occasions, it was quite rare. But I talked to a lot of people who had plenty of conspiracy theories about claims, benefits, enrollment practices, etc. Most of these people simply misunderstood their benefits and wouldn't accept any explanation that pointed out their mistakes. After working for two different health insurance companies, I still have respect for the integrity of those companies, even being a person concerned about poverty and social justice concerns.

The purpose of this movie is not to be "fair and balanced" (if such a thing is possible), however, but rather to demystify the concept of "socialized medicine." Moore highlights an alternative way of looking at the issue. His cherry-picking of bad stories in the US and good stories in countries with universal health care asks the question: Is it really so bad? I believe that we should try to be more balanced and nuanced, but frankly, intellectual nuance is a thing lost in the media and popular culture. Moore speaks in a way that people can resonate with his message.

It really is a good movie. Funny. Helpful. And I would certainly recommend people watch this with family and friends for invigorating discussions.

Here are some interesting articles on the movie:

• CNN: "Analysis: 'Sicko' numbers mostly accurate; more context needed"
• NY Times: "For Filmmaker, ‘Sicko’ Is a Jumping-Off Point for Health Care Change"
  
• International Herald Tribune (AP story): "Michael Moore gives the accused little say in 'Sicko'"
• Pasadena Weekly: "Sick of the system"
  
• Pasadena Star-News: "Finding remedies to a `Sicko' system"
  

Bread for the World mentioned on the House Floor

Jerry Lewis (R-CA), who is the ranking Republican member of the House Appropriations Committee (and was once the Chair of the committee), mentioned Bread on the House floor the other day (Wednesday, 6/20) in his opening statements about the Foreign Operations Bill (catch a summary of the bill here). His remarks were in support of the United States government putting their money into ending poverty. The people that I am working with in my internship, David Gist and Holly Hight, have been working with the congressman for quite some time and it is a wonderful reward to see that their efforts have really made a difference.

Here are his remarks:

Now, I know most Members feel they weren't elected to support international assistance programs. In fact, Mr. Chairman, I am sure there are many Members who feel that the United States should dramatically reduce the amount of money we spend around the world and focus our resources on domestic priorities. This sort of isolationist point of view has no place in today's shrinking world. One needs only to look to Europe as an example of a once powerful and influential nation withdrew its resources from around the world and focused inward. What has since been termed as the ``French model'' resulted in massive inflation, high unemployment rates within the country, and severe internal crises. The United States should not follow the ``French model,'' a misguided path that essentially has caused the French to disappear as a powerful force in the world.

I remember as a young man attending UCLA I was fortunate to participate in a program that preceded the Peace Corps called Project India . As I joined other young students in traveling to villages around a country where poverty and ever-present caste systems were always visible, I was struck by the importance that personal freedom and opportunity have on the human condition, especially if you had the good fortune of being born in the United States of America .

Today, India has outlawed the caste system and is the largest democracy in the world, as well as our strong ally in the global war on terror. I am particularly pleased that in any congressional district there are large numbers of my constituents who are actively involved, advocating for increases in our international assistance program.

In recent meetings with the Results Group, with CARE, Bread for the World and others, I have noticed that more and more people are beginning to understand that they, too, have a role in our role for leadership in the world. Theirs are the voices from the grass roots, a perspective that we need as Americans to recognize that we must continue to lead in the world, for indeed, without our leadership, the poor of the world will suffer most. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to support this fabulous demonstration of work on both sides of the aisle together.