On Tuesday, December 1, President Barack Obama entered the renowned West Point Military Academy in New York to give an anticipated speech on his new Afghanistan strategy. His elaborate speech mentioned various imperative points that will occur in the upcoming months.

He plans to order an addtional 30,000 soldiers to Afghanistan by next summer in order to bring the eight-year war to “a successful conclusion.” Afterwards, President Obama said that the U.S. would start withdrawing its troops by 2011. Obama said, “It calls for an accelerated timeframe to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan.”

However, both conservative and liberal lawmakers sharply criticized President Obama’s plan to start a U.S. troop withdrawal from Afghanistan by July 2011.They have been debating that if the U.S. withdraws from Afghanistan, it will allow the enemy to prepare and become stronger.

After the President\’s speech, numerous parents and family members of the 30,000 troops being sent out were devastated and very sad to hear the painful news.

As of now, various Americans will just have to wait and see if everything will turn out as smoothly as anticipated.

Yes, health care reform needs to happen. Yes, we need cheaper, easier, and better care for everyone, but it is neither the government\’s role nor its obligation to provide charity. Allowing the government to impose a policy of universal health care that carries a potential price tag of 1 trillion dollars or more would be both counterproductive and detrimental, economically and medically.

Now, I use the word counterproductive because in places such as Canada and France where policies of universal health care are in effect, wait times for an MRI screening for cancer are generally upwards of a month, unless one foregoes the government option and opts for a private clinic. Needless to say, the wait for radiation treatment is just as long (1). In fact, in an effort to improve these wait times, Canada is beginning to send patients across the border for treatment (2) (3) because wait times for an MRI in the U.S. are only a few days, and radiation treatment usually begins with a couple of weeks.

Of course, we have not taken into consideration how much the costs could damage the economy. Take our current debt of 11.4 trillion dollars, add an additional 1 trillion dollars (4), and we have a mess upon ourselves. Allowing a government that cannot properly fund a car exchange program (Cash for Clunkers) to monopolize a multi-billion dollar industry is akin to piloting an X-wing without an R2 mech droid. Failure is inevitable.

This is not to say that we should give up on reforming health care. No, we should be driven to push even harder. Reform is not difficult, and it begins on the lowest levels. First and foremost, hospitals and medical offices need to modernize records and prescriptions. By using electronic prescription programs, doctors can both avoid dangerous drug combinations and avoid the cost of paper, saving a potential 4 billion dollars and cutting drug related injuries by up to a third. If 90% of hospitals agreed to modernize their records, we could save up to an estimated $80 billion, according to Richard Hillestad, Ph.D.

Also crucial to cheaper health care is tort reform. In 2006, Harvard School of Public Health found that four out of every ten malpractice lawsuits were filed “without merit.” Doctors are forced to perform additional tests, referrals, and consultations in order to avoid malpractice lawsuits. Consequently, prices on these tests and consultations go skyward. Tort and liability reform would purge the system of frivolous lawsuits and allow doctors to lower prices. It is also crucial to ensure that medical errors happen less frequently by creating a system to log and report errors and ensure that proper investigations take place.

But perhaps the biggest way to save money and cut costs on health care is to allow Wal-Mart to expand its generics and walk-in programs. Wal-Mart\’s goal has always been lower prices and higher customer satisfaction, and the company has already helped to fix the health care system by providing cheaper generic drugs. A 90-day supply of any generic drug is only ten dollars. In addition, Wal-Mart has also opened walk-in clinics in stores located in Arkansas and Dallas. Realize that a parent would be able to have a child vaccinated without insurance and at an affordable price, all while getting the week\’s groceries. An attractive idea, isn\’t it? Wal-Mart aims to have 400 walk-in clinics by 2010.

It is true the Land of the Free is the only industrialized nation that doesn\’t offer universal health care. But the United States has never been a follower. No, we have been the trailblazers, the leaders, the City upon a Hill. We must continue doing so, providing our own answers. To give up would be to change the very nature of the nation.

Sources:

1. http://www.cancercare.on.ca/ocs/wait-times/radiationwt/
2. http://freep.com/article/20090820/BUSINESS06/908200420/1319/
3. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1115892
4. http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5icf1XEHHem8Z_Ck1V-oxciA6dCUAD9A16JV80

By Sami Yerunkar, Student Life Editor

Healthcare reform is the latest in political discourse since the November elections. Republicans and Democrats, Liberals, Conservatives, and Moderates alike are striving to help decide the future of healthcare in the United States.

For those who haven\’t kept up with recent events, the United States is the only industrialized nation not to have a universal healthcare system. Universal healthcare is health coverage for all individuals in a political region by the government, through public funds from a single or multiple providers. The state of healthcare in the United States is questionable, as over 15% of the population is uninsured, and even those who are insured are not guaranteed total health coverage.

The difference here lies in the private nature of healthcare in the United States. As the industry is private, companies are driven to use ethically questionable methods to provide healthcare. This creates what some people describe as “a system that attempts to get patients out the door as quickly as possible.”

This is the reason why, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the United States ranks first in healthcare expenditure, but actual use of healthcare services in the country is much lower than the median for OECD members. The United States also ranks much lower in life expectancy, infant mortality, and overall satisfaction, according to the World Health Organization.

Healthcare reform with a public healthcare option was high among the many campaign promises made by President Obama. Four months after President Obama took Office, the U.S. House of Representatives unveiled a public health bill that would deliver many of the president\’s election promises, but would not provide for complete universal healthcare to compromise for the U.S. national debt and lack of funds.

Although the bill is not exactly what the liberal public had asked for in healthcare reform, it is definitely a step in the right direction. Public opinion for the health bill is low because of the complexity of the bill and a largely  uninformed public. It would be a shame if people formed opinions about the bill without taking into account the hardships and risks faced by the uninsured people of the United States.

Medical debt is the number one cause of bankruptcy in the United States today, as the uninsured and unfortunate are forced to pay ludicrous medical costs, and the more daring and reckless crowd turns to medical tourism in an attempt to cheaply and dangerously satisfy their needs.

It would be shameful if the land of opportunity did not allow everyone the right to live without constant fear of the consequences of injury. Opposing the health bill at this stage would be akin to ignoring the needs of the less fortunate and stopping the United States from taking the crucial steps to fix this inefficient healthcare system.

By Brian Larzelere, Staff writer

President Obama gave his first address to a joint session of Congress, outlining his agenda for the nation, and promising action- especially in tough situations to come. In almost an hour, Mr. Obama covered his plans to attack economic crisis, America’s dependence on foreign oil, the rising cost of health insurance, and the problems facing public education. He also challenged Congress to pass a bill limiting carbon emissions, and for American youth to pursue post high school education and job training.

Critics point out the financial cost of Mr. Obama’s proposals, particularly the recent $787 billion stimulus plan, subsides for alternative energy, and a universal health care system. His agenda is an ambitious one, even in healthy times. With the declined tax revenue of a recession, the funds to fulfill these goals simply isn’t there.
President Obama spoke specifically to the matter of the budget. He renewed his pledge to cut the federal deficit in half in his first term, by reducing military spending, and elimination wasteful, and inefficient programs. Mr. Obama contends universal health care will create a net savings to the country, and a federal investment in education will pay returns in a better workforce.

“And dropping out of high school is no longer an option. It’s not just quitting on yourself, it’s quitting on your country — and this country needs and values the talents of every American.”

President Obama cited the importance of school, “a good education is no longer just a pathway to opportunity — it is a prerequisite.” With the rise of globalization, this is becoming more and more true. A high school diploma and a degree in a relevant field is more important than ever.

Of interest to many is the President’s plan for public education, and college. As a part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, struggling families will be able to receive $2500 for each of the four years of college. The seemingly high cost of tuition is a major concern to families, especially in California, where state budget shortfalls are expected to raise UC and Cal State tut ions by 7 to 10 percent. Mr. Obama’s plan has the potential to close the gap between savings and tuition for many undergraduates.

Even in the most trying times, with inherited challenges, the new leader of the free world put a positive spin on current circumstances, “We will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger than before.”

A lot of big promises were made, and nothing will be easy. Can Barack Obama make good on his pacts with America? We can only hope.

THIS IS PART OF THE BARON BANNER BLOGS, A PUBLIC FORUM FOR STUDENT EXPRESION.  THERE IS NO EDITING.

View the other Baron Banner staff blogs here!

A greater say in government marks the progress of this increasingly diverse society. Bountiful is the opportunity to become a councilman, state congressional leader, or other governmental position hitherto denied to ethnic minorities but now within the grasp of anyone willing to invest time, effort, and no small amount of intellect, imagination, and integrity. I daresay that even you, my Baron Banner readership, might become President of the United States. The only problem, however, is that this is much more noticeable, especially if you are not a White, Anglo-Saxon Protestant, with a penis.

Some people just can\’t vote well. Our Founding Fathers, the same ones who said that all men were created equal, knew that people can be easily swayed with the winds of the zeitgeist. Some issues that are easily waved as red herrings and thrust into the faces of the voters should not matter, but do, sadly enough. When Barack Obama first announced his campaign for presidency, talks sprang up on YouTube and major news programs alike of how Black he was.

As Senator Biden put it, “Barack Obama is the first African-American who is clean and articulate,” implying the schema for Blacks is hardly so. (Unfortunately for the senator, these jabs were not lightning-quick enough to avoid scrutiny.) Ultimately, the main concern is not “Is Obama Black?” but would it make a difference if he tried to respond to what others perceive as Black. If he walked it out to the DNC, pimped out baggy jeans that sagged to reveal leopard boxers, grills gleaming, and freaking with every vixen that he met? If he came bouncing to his inauguration in a Cadillac with the hydraulics on max and 23-inch chrome wheels spinning? If he played the National Anthem, “Get Low,” at the State of the Union? If he were to uphold the current funhouse-mirror images of black culture, no one, not even he himself, would take him seriously.

Such stereotyping offers a brutal double standard that pigeonholes the candidates and unfairly instructs our decision-making and thoughts of race relations. We are told as schoolchildren that differences do not matter, and that everyone is equal. To approve otherwise would invite harangues of being called intolerant. All the while, the differences always sat in front of us, but, told to be color-blind, we become just that: blind the meaning of the color dyed into every fabric of American life. For all the leaps the United States has taken as a country, its people cannot change the way they look at each other. The glaring differences from the “norm” turn the democratic process into a debacle of “Hell no, I\’m not going to vote for some…” Whatever happened to Lyndon Johnson\’s upholding of social equality: “We seek not just freedom but opportunity, not just equality as a right and as a theory, but equality as a fact and as a result”?

A vote means choosing a candidate whose ideals, not color, best reflect mine. That is a premier hallmark that I hope America achieves, for if not, informed citizens can easily become marionettes led to the ballot box. For those who believe that political power should be delegated through the tactics of a frilly high school election, consider our current situation a triumph of public policy. But for those who are hungry for a different type of politics, now is the time for social change in which we begin to see the character beneath the color.