Image by via Flickr

This was not an accident.  America was always exceptional.  From the time the early settlers arrived on our shores through the colonists’ fight for freedom to the war on slavery and our joining in WWI, the citizens believed in doing what is right rather than what is easy.  If others suffered, we suffered with them and tried to right the wrong, without regard for what dissenters might think or say. 

The same kind of attitude prevailed in our nation’s businesses, both large and small.  A good idea became a great idea when people got excited and applied American ingenuity and old-fashioned hard work to make the dream come true.  Our generation saw the advent of frozen food including pizza, television followed by TV dinners, jet travel, fast food restaurants, a man on the moon spawned Tang in several flavors as well as satellites, copying and answering machines, pagers, cell phones, personal computers and all the hi-tech gear that followed, plus much more.

Most of these inventions changed our lives forever and continue to prompt change as they inspire an ongoing flood of new and improved products vying for the consumer’s attention – many of which will make our quality of life somewhat better, and all of them are designed to make money for the individuals and companies involved in bringing these products to the marketplace, here and around the world.  America has always provided an atmosphere for creativity and we have shown the world how to market goods and services.  So, while there’s cheap labor available in other parts of the world, we are the ones with the ideas, build the initial products and provide the marketing capabilities to establish brands worldwide.

Because America creates what others eventually copy, we must continue to innovate in areas such as energy, food and pharmaceuticals for the world.  The need to innovate applies to more than business ventures.  Our educational system is in great need of help.  Just as we test market products, it is vital to try then perfect new ways to better educate our children and prepare them for the changing world they will face.  America’s health care system needs to be studied and revamped to attend the needs of the aging citizens and to make it affordable to our younger population.

America’s exceptionalism will be challenged in the years ahead.  We must not let this happen from within.  Instead, we have to view the problems facing us lemons and make some lemonade.  That’s the American way.

Image via

Democrats cannot write bills behind closed doors and try to jam legislation through based on their current power in Washington.  By the same token, Republican have got to stop hiding in the weeds and taking shots at everything the opposing party does.  Rather, it’s time to go back to the peoples’ business.  This means agreeing that the health care system needs to undergo significant change over an extended period of time but in a common-sense, fiscally-responsible, bi-partisan manner.  Otherwise, the finger pointing and bickering in Washington will spell the end of the careers for many politicians.

It’s not rocket science.  Health insurance costs continue to climb.  Too many Americans are without coverage.  Waste, fraud and abuse abounds within the system.  The problems can’t be addressed or fixed all at once.  So, let’s agree that health care is going to be studied immediately and adjusted over time with the goal being coverage we can afford and quality of care second to none.  We can figure out how to make this work, but do the politicians, the insurance companies and the medical organizations must come together, forget their own agendas and start considering what’s best for the citizens of this country?

As part of the pre-boomer generation (those born between 1930 and 1945), I remember how people from all walks of life came together and fought our enemies in World War II.  Folks forgot about labels.  We weren’t Democrats or Republicans we were Americans pulling together in a common cause.  If addressed honestly, health care can be something that unites rather than divides us.

Remember, health care accounts for about a sixth of our economy.  This is a real concern when combined with a deficit beyond belief, out-of-control government spending and a double-digit unemployment rate that just won’t go day.  On top of this, there are more spending plans waiting to be introduced in Congress.  The only thing to do is to stop Washington from doing what it’s been doing or we’re going to keep getting what we’ve been getting.  Translated, this means no new spending.  Prioritize the country’s need.  And re-evaluate where our money is going now and where it needs to go in the future.

At the same time, businesses around the country need to join in the fight to keep America afloat and bring it back to the land of opportunity.  This requires the best minds we have focusing on what they know best to get the job done.  By applying this same kind of discipline to health care reform, we will undoubtedly end up with something that meets the needs of each individual American.  And, that’s good for all of us.     

Image via

In addition to advising those in their 40s to forego mammograms, the task force suggests that those ages 50 to 74 skip annual screenings in favor of scheduling them on an every other year basis.  At the same time the guidelines advise doctors to stop teaching patients how to perform self-examinations. 

Are these the recommendations of a physicians’ group?  Were the findings a result of research conducted by the cancer society?  No, the guidelines came from a government appointed panel.  Even though the examinations could continue to save lives, there are fewer cases of cancer in younger women; so the panel concluded that the costs and patient stress associated with possible false positives did not pencil out in terms of risks versus rewards.

In the last year, $3.3 billion was spent on mammograms.  If insurance companies and physicians adhere to the new guidelines, this expenditure will be greatly reduced.  But what about the person who does not benefit from early detection?  They will be a statistic in the government’s data bank even though they are someone’s daughter, sister, wife or mother.  The human element is not a factor to the number crunchers, but it is to families.

Our family had a harrowing brush with breast cancer many years ago.  It was the fall of 1957 when my mother, then in her early 40s, discovered a lump in her breast.  Examinations determined it was cancer, surgery was recommended and a radical mastectomy was performed.  Afterwards, a series of deep x-ray treatments followed, which made mom extremely ill; however, she fought through the discomfort and received the recommended dosage.  In those days the survival rates were pretty low, but my mother beat the cancer and died, just a few years ago, from natural causes at the age of ninety.  Had it not been for early detection and treatment, she would not have enjoyed all those years and we would have missed the joy of her presence.  This is our family’s story, but there are thousands and thousands of success stories with one thing in common: early detection saves lives.

The task force issuing the guidelines was appointed by the previous administration, but such panels will become more powerful as the government becomes more involved in running the nation’s health care system.  Therefore, the concern is not about one set of guidelines for one deadly disease.  It’s about who has control over our health care decisions.  This is troubling to all of us, particularly pre-boomers on Medicare, because it could signal the beginning of rationing and the end of quality health care as we know it.

Image via

Way back when, the headlines talked about the need for health care reform.  We were told that 48 million Americans had no coverage, making the US the worst of the industrialized nations in terms of taking care of its people.  Of course, this number was grossly overstated.  It included those who were young, in good health and chose not to purchase insurance; illegal residents; and those between jobs with short-term insurance lapses.  The practical number is less than half this total, but that’s still unacceptable.

The key concern is to have children and those with pre-existing conditions covered.  However this can be accomplished without tearing down the entire health care system.  Remember, those living in other countries where universal health care is available often come here for treatment, if they have the money, because our health care is considered to be better quality than they can get at home.  So how do we 1) cover everyone, 2) maintain quality and 3) not raise taxes?  The answer is simple; we can’t.  Pick any two, but you can’t have all three. 

Medicare is already targeted for cuts of more than $500 billion.  Proponents claim this will be accomplished through the reduction of waste, fraud and abuse; but most seniors believe it will mean a reduction in benefits.  Otherwise, why didn’t the government do something about the problems when they discovered them?  Or, was this just another political move to take from one group in order to give to another, more deserving, group? 

Have our representatives forgotten that there are about 40 million people 65 and over and that the aging boomers will be swelling this numbers in the years ahead?  Are they saying to us that we don’t deserve quality health care through the doctors we choose and receive the tests, drugs and treatments these medical professionals prescribe — a portion of which is paid for by the supplemental insurance we buy?  Don’t they realize we paid our taxes and supported the system all our working lives and therefore earned the right to proper health care as the aging process continues?

The idea of states having the right to opt-out of the government option if they wish is ridiculous.  It’s doubtful a governor or state assembly will vote to opt-out when the residents know they’re being taxed for it whether it’s being offered or not.  This option is supposed to lower prices by being competitive to private insurers.  On the surface this option sounds good, but it will likely reduce competition and everyone will end up paying the price for such insurance through higher taxes as the government option becomes the only option.  And that means no options at all.