When Wars Collide

We Americans love to declare war on whatever social problem we feel is of vital importance - and sometimes we assume that our political nemesis has declared the war on us. At any given time, depending on who you ask, any number of wars may be raging. From the religious right's point of view, one of those is the War on Christianity. From the progressive left's point of view, a big one is the War on Women's Health.

Over the last couple of weeks we've watched as these two wars met head on following the Obama administration's refusal to grant religious employers an exemption to new rules requiring that health insurance plans include coverage for birth control and other reproductive health services. When we talk about religious employers here, we're mostly referring to nonprofit social service organizations, universities, and hospitals: organizations that serve the general public (not just co-religionists), and who employ people of all faiths and beliefs.

To the right, this is a violation of these groups' (primarily Catholic) fundamental right to religious freedom, by forcing them to pay for a product (contraception at a minimum, abortion at the extreme) that goes against their beliefs.

To the left, the denial of this coverage violates the employee's (mostly women) access to a full range of health care options, and forces them to abide by their employer's religious restrictions - whether or not they are of the same religion.

Whose rights are more important? The employee's rights to make their own private health care decisions with their doctor's advice, or the employer's rights to not have to support practices they don't believe in?

I believe that the employee's rights have to win out. Not only for the access to care, but also for the right to privacy. Under HIPPA, we all have the right to privacy regarding our medical records, including not having to share our health care decisions with our employer.

But the employer is paying for it, right? Well, let's take a look at that a little closer. Those against the administration's decision are saying that religious organizations will "be forced to pay for contraception and abortions." But that's simply not true. Employers pay for health insurance only. What the employee does with that health insurance is their own business.

Saying that the employer has the right to dictate health care choices made by an employee is the same as saying the employer has the right to dictate what the employee may or may not purchase with their paycheck.

Do you need to ask your boss permission before making any purchases for your home? It's the employer's money after all, isn't it? Of course not! Once they pay you, it's your money, and your decision how it's spent.

Same with health insurance. Once the employer purchases it - as part of your compensation package for your labor - what you do with it is between you and your doctor only. At least, it should be that way.

Unfortunately, this being an election year, too much will be made of this perfectly reasonable decision by the administration, and they may be forced into a compromise position. While the compromise may temporarily appease those on the religious right, it will certainly be a set-back for women's access to health, and blow to privacy for us all.

50 Days In

No, not 50 days since I've posted a blog here (actually, it's been a little longer than that), but 50 days (plus a couple) since Barack Obama was sworn in as President, and I know you're all just dying to find out what I'm thinking. Is the honeymoon over? Do I regret my vote? Am I loving everything he does?

No. No. And No.

The honeymoon is not over, I think he's doing a great job in a very difficult situation. I'm still pleased with my choice, and have no regrets over not sticking with an independent or third party candidate. But, no, I'm not thrilled with everything.

But I'm fine with not being thrilled with everything (and, really, who can be seriously paying attention and agree with any politician all the time?). The point is that even where I've disagreed or had a different opinion on something he's proposed, I can at least understand where he's coming from. It may be a different approach, or a different degree of attack than I would have preferred, but I can agree that it's for reasons that I can at least respect.

I'm still finding this a refreshing change from the previous administration, where it was not simply an honest disagreement with a particular detail of a policy, but where I was constantly being outraged with what I perceived to the wholesale destruction of all of what I believe to be great about this country. But back to Obama...

Example one of my disagreement: Obama's tax plan will cap the tax deduction for charitable contributions at 28 percent (current cap 35%). The positive side: this is to help pay for some rather expensive, but needed, health care proposals. The negative: this could put a damper on on major donor giving at a time when the nonprofit sector is being hit on all sides with reductions in revenue coupled with increased demand for services.

As a guy who lives in the nonprofit sector, this concerns me. But I'm not as panicked about it as some people are. The truth is, we won't really know how much of a hit this will bring to the nonprofit sector until long after it's happened, and it's being done for all the right reasons. Taking a hit to fund health care reform feels a whole lot better to me than taking a hit to give billionaires another tax cut.

Another area of disagreement is in Education. My wife is a teacher, and she and her co-workers are upset about the President's recent speech on the topic of failing schools and education reform. Obama crossed in front of a few sacred cows and promised more of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) policies that failed so miserably before.

Again, my wife and I (and many others) believe that NCLB was a failed policy from the concept (other than a nifty title), and that the problem was not simply "not doing enough of it." But, as I reminded my wife at dinner tonight, we knew this was coming. Obama, the candidate, was clear about his support for NCLB. This was a trade-off we made back in November so we have no right to start acting surprised or hurt by it today.

So, am I still drinking the KoolAid and thinking that President Obama can do no wrong? Absolutely not. But I'm still willing to give the man a chance. Overall, I'll give the First Fifty a strong 85% approval rating. Will it remain that high for the next four years? I doubt it, but I'm enjoying this moment while I can.

Universal Health Care

Here's my second political collaboration video with my conservative friend, PappyStu. The topic today is Universal Health Care, and whether or not the U.S. needs some form of reform to provide health care for all.

As with my previous collaboration with PappyStu, the point of these videos isn't to reach consensus; it's just to begin a civil conversation on issues that are important in our national life.

I'm the guy on the left, politically speaking.