An opinion piece written by someone I know from a mailing list:
Dean No Left-Wing Crusader http://www.ripsawnews.com/2003-07-09/op.html Julie Waters “One reason I was elected five times is because I can stand up to the liberal wing of the party”—Howard Dean, as reported in the Rutland Herald, June 24, 2001
Howard Dean is saying a lot of things I like right now: He’s against the invasion of Iraq, believes in insuring everyone who needs it, proudly talks about Vermont’s Civil Union laws and is adding a much needed left-wing kick to the Democratic party.
This all leaves me feeling very confused.
Let me preface what I’m about to say by explaining that I think Dean was a perfectly adequate governor. On social issues, he’s relatively left-wing: He’s pro-choice and has been a strong proponent of programs intended to give low-income Vermonters access to decent medical care.
He’s not, however, a liberal by any stretch. As quoted in the Rutland Herald, he’s “in the middle” and even identifies with the right on some issues: “Many of the principles I have about fiscal management are more akin to Republican than Democrat …”
Dean’s been talking about the civil unions bill he signed into law as though he championed it. This is very different from his debate strategy, in which his primary justification for having supported the law was because the Supreme Court of Vermont ordered it.
Mind you, it’s not the worst idea in the world to have a president who is willing to defer to a higher body. But what concerns me here is the disconnect: the idea that Dean is somehow this paragon of left-wing virtue, with a history of doing the progressive thing when, in fact, Vermont already has its Progressive party, and it’s not the Democrats.
Let’s look at another disconnect: he trumpets Vermont Medicaid as though it’s the country’s answer to lack of health care insurance. It’s not a bad program. I’ve been on it for several years now and it’s served me well. My co-payments are relatively small, though it’s far from the most comprehensive, and it does cover some of my prescription costs. These are all good things.
But it’s been constantly declining since I was first on the program. Program fees have increased while services have dropped. I used to get dental coverage. This got slashed a couple of years ago. After a federal budget freeze following 9.11, more benefits were cut from Vermont Medicaid (chiropractic care and some vision benefits are two strong examples).
To this day, I have yet to reconcile Dean’s words on the subject of medical care with the reality of the topic. He claims that Vermont’s is fully funded, and yet it relies on federal money to support it. So how, on the federal level, is this going to work? Are we going to ask for supplemental income from the World Health Organization to fund it?
And a followup...
Date: 2003-07-14 09:01 am (UTC)Dean No Left-Wing Crusader
http://www.ripsawnews.com/2003-07-09/op.html
Julie Waters
“One reason I was elected five times is because I can stand up to the liberal wing of the party”—Howard Dean, as reported in the Rutland Herald, June 24, 2001
Howard Dean is saying a lot of things I like right now: He’s against the invasion of Iraq, believes in insuring everyone who needs it, proudly talks about Vermont’s Civil Union laws and is adding a much needed left-wing kick to the Democratic party.
This all leaves me feeling very confused.
Let me preface what I’m about to say by explaining that I think Dean was a perfectly adequate governor. On social issues, he’s relatively left-wing: He’s pro-choice and has been a strong proponent of programs intended to give low-income Vermonters access to decent medical care.
He’s not, however, a liberal by any stretch. As quoted in the Rutland Herald, he’s “in the middle” and even identifies with the right on some issues: “Many of the principles I have about fiscal management are more akin to Republican than Democrat …”
Dean’s been talking about the civil unions bill he signed into law as though he championed it. This is very different from his debate strategy, in which his primary justification for having supported the law was because the Supreme Court of Vermont ordered it.
Mind you, it’s not the worst idea in the world to have a president who is willing to defer to a higher body. But what concerns me here is the disconnect: the idea that Dean is somehow this paragon of left-wing virtue, with a history of doing the progressive thing when, in fact, Vermont already has its Progressive party, and it’s not the Democrats.
Let’s look at another disconnect: he trumpets Vermont Medicaid as though it’s the country’s answer to lack of health care insurance. It’s not a bad program. I’ve been on it for several years now and it’s served me well. My co-payments are relatively small, though it’s far from the most comprehensive, and it does cover some of my prescription costs. These are all good things.
But it’s been constantly declining since I was first on the program. Program fees have increased while services have dropped. I used to get dental coverage. This got slashed a couple of years ago. After a federal budget freeze following 9.11, more benefits were cut from Vermont Medicaid (chiropractic care and some vision benefits are two strong examples).
To this day, I have yet to reconcile Dean’s words on the subject of medical care with the reality of the topic. He claims that Vermont’s is fully funded, and yet it relies on federal money to support it. So how, on the federal level, is this going to work? Are we going to ask for supplemental income from the World Health Organization to fund it?