HOW DID I GET HERE: Final Decision?
Today is the day. It's Monday, March 10, and by 5:00 pm, I must make a final decision. Shall I withdraw my name from the race or continue as the Democratic candidate for State House, District 40, in red Montana?
For a week now, I've been in shock, trying to adjust to the fact that I agreed to have my name put on the November ballot. What does it all mean? How will it effect my life? How will it impact my daughter's life? Do I really want to do this?
I'm free from any worry about what the Board might think; that hurdle is behind me. I have not been chosen to serve on the Board of the organization for which I volunteer. But I am concerned now about the true feelings of my daughter when it comes to my running for office as a Democrat.
She has lived with her husband in this red community much longer than I have. She teaches at the local elementary school and has built close ties to friends. She takes most things in stride when it comes to my projects but is not built like me and doesn't have a fire in her belly about politics. In fact, she tends more towards moderation in most things. I do not want to cause her any embarrassment because of my choices. I determine early in this day to get her true feelings about this latest project. She has been my co-conspirator over this past week and has not yet shared my secret with anyone. But what does she really think? This will help in determining my final decision.
In my journal-writing this morning, I create a title for this possible project: Running Blue at 72 -- in a Red State. It kind of has a rhythm to it. When I propose it to my daughter, she too thinks it fits well. She also tells me that whatever I decide to do, she will be O.K. with it. It will not be a problem for her. We are each our own person, she says, and I should do whatever I think is right for me. Bless her.
It is now 2:00 pm, three hours left. I suddenly get into a panic. How will I do this? I'm not an extrovert; I'm an introvert. How do I think I can do all that is required? What will be the results when it comes to die-hard opposition? Will I be safe? I can't confront people about what they should do. I can't go around and knock on doors. I really can't put myself out there in this way.
Immediately, I sit down at the computer and send out S.O.S. emails to sympathetic and trusted friends. I tell them of my situation and panic and ask for advice, suggestions, feedback -- anything that could help. I have three hours left, I say. Within that period and even into the next day, to a person they respond with nothing but support and encouragement. You can do this! they tell me.
Shortly before 5 pm, calmness overcomes my panic. I know now what to do. I discover in the pit of my stomach what I really want. I want to go through this experience as a 72-year-old political-junkie neophyte, running blue in a red state. How many other people do I know who have done this kind of thing? But the kicker is that I want to write about it as I experience it -- that's what I really want.
The clock shows that 5 pm has come and gone; there's no going back. I'm in -- for the long haul.
Sunday, March 30, 2014
Friday, March 28, 2014
*Believe the Facts, Not the Fiction: Negative side-effects of Obamacare have not materialized
Fiction: Obamacare will lead to a serious decline in full-time employment.
Fact: The number of part-time workers has fallen while full-time employment has grown. Since March, 2010, part-time workers has fallen by 300,000. In 2013, full-time employment has grown by over 2 million.
Fiction: Millions of Americans have lost their non-group, individual health insurance policy due to cancellations forced by Obamacare.
Facts:
a. Pre-Obama, ordinary changes in individual health insurance policies occurred from year to year and usually resulted in the consumer purchasing a new plan after a short period of time. Since the non-group market is highly volatile, just 17 percent retain coverage for more than two years.
b. Pre-Obama, close to 17 percent of individual policy holders were losing their individual market policies. Similarly, 18.6 percent (roughly, 2.6 million people) had plans cancelled as a result of Obamacare. This is a number well below the estimates of 5 million or considerably more being tossed about by Obamacare opposition.
c. Those who say their health insurance policy was cancelled? Over half is likely to be eligible for coverage assistance, mostly through marketplace subsidies. They can enroll in a Medicaid program or receive subsidies on the healthcare exchanges. Many if not most will be covered at a lower price while greatly improving the quality of coverage. One million, then, will replace cancelled policies with something that may cost more. This is far less dramatic, however, than what the Obamacare opposition has been saying.
Problem: With detractors pushing dire effects of Obamacare rather than educating them, many people are not aware of new state Marketplaces, few know if their state expanded Medicaid, and many lack confidence to enroll, make choices and pay premiums. As long as politicians, pundits and special interests continue to lie about what Obamacare means and what it does not mean to the American public, workable fixes that benefit the public and improve American health care cannot happen. Facts matter.
The latest: In the last three months of 2013, there has been a drop from 17.1 percent to 15.9 percent of American adults that are uninsured. This translates to 3 million to 4 million who are now getting coverage who did not have it before. There has been improvement in all demographics except Hispanics. According to Gallup, the number of Americans who still do not have health insurance coverage is on track to reach the lowest quarterly number since 2008.
*Entirely taken from FORBES, Rick Unger, Contributor, March 10, 2014
Fiction: Obamacare will lead to a serious decline in full-time employment.
Fact: The number of part-time workers has fallen while full-time employment has grown. Since March, 2010, part-time workers has fallen by 300,000. In 2013, full-time employment has grown by over 2 million.
Fiction: Millions of Americans have lost their non-group, individual health insurance policy due to cancellations forced by Obamacare.
Facts:
a. Pre-Obama, ordinary changes in individual health insurance policies occurred from year to year and usually resulted in the consumer purchasing a new plan after a short period of time. Since the non-group market is highly volatile, just 17 percent retain coverage for more than two years.
b. Pre-Obama, close to 17 percent of individual policy holders were losing their individual market policies. Similarly, 18.6 percent (roughly, 2.6 million people) had plans cancelled as a result of Obamacare. This is a number well below the estimates of 5 million or considerably more being tossed about by Obamacare opposition.
c. Those who say their health insurance policy was cancelled? Over half is likely to be eligible for coverage assistance, mostly through marketplace subsidies. They can enroll in a Medicaid program or receive subsidies on the healthcare exchanges. Many if not most will be covered at a lower price while greatly improving the quality of coverage. One million, then, will replace cancelled policies with something that may cost more. This is far less dramatic, however, than what the Obamacare opposition has been saying.
Problem: With detractors pushing dire effects of Obamacare rather than educating them, many people are not aware of new state Marketplaces, few know if their state expanded Medicaid, and many lack confidence to enroll, make choices and pay premiums. As long as politicians, pundits and special interests continue to lie about what Obamacare means and what it does not mean to the American public, workable fixes that benefit the public and improve American health care cannot happen. Facts matter.
The latest: In the last three months of 2013, there has been a drop from 17.1 percent to 15.9 percent of American adults that are uninsured. This translates to 3 million to 4 million who are now getting coverage who did not have it before. There has been improvement in all demographics except Hispanics. According to Gallup, the number of Americans who still do not have health insurance coverage is on track to reach the lowest quarterly number since 2008.
*Entirely taken from FORBES, Rick Unger, Contributor, March 10, 2014
Thursday, March 27, 2014
HOW DID I GET HERE: Pins and Needles
It is now four days since I file as Democrat for State House candidacy in the red state of Montana. I have not slept well since then. I've put myself in a position in this town of pushing upstream while the current is flowing downstream. I don't know what's going to happen next.
I do know, however, that the next Sunday is the Annual Meeting of an organization for which I've been volunteering the past year. At this meeting of the Board, a decision will be made about changing Board membership for the coming year. I have been approached twice, once last fall and once this spring, by two different Board members about my interest in serving on the Board. My original reaction is uncertainty since, get this, I prefer to do the volunteer work without getting involved in the politics of the organization! Yeah, right! But when the point is made that the Board is looking for people who are interested in the organization, I quickly affirm that yes, I am very interested.
The second person to ask about my interest in Board membership invites me to visit a Board meeting this spring prior to the one in which elections will take place. She suggests that it will give me a chance to see how the Board works and decide whether or not joining it will be something I want to do. I visit that meeting, observe the group and even feel comfortable enough to participate in a discussion. This coming Sunday then are the elections. I will be attending.
I am very nervous. My filing on Monday is a secret between my daughter and myself. What if word gets out too quickly about what I've done, that I've filed for elective office as a Democrat? It might ruin my chances of being invited onto this Board. Since first being approached, my interest in serving has increased and I'm looking forward to the possibility of an invitation. I am aware that my name is already listed as a Democratic candidate on the Statewide legislative website. I check after receiving my first survey. Possibly someone on the Board has also seen that list, or has heard about it. If so, will it have an impact on whether or not I'm invited on the Board?
In my head, I run through several scenarios. My name will be brought up -- it only makes sense since I've been approached twice by different Board members. The question then is how do I respond? Do I tell them about my candidacy before the vote or just let it pass? My worry is all about how big an impact my candidacy will have on the vote.
I walk toward the building where the Board meets. One member doesn't seem to see me right away, not until I make a point of waving. Another greets me soberly, making a point of the phone message she left, thanking me for installment of a faucet in one of the building's restrooms. The meeting room is quiet as first arrivals begin arranging placement of tables and chairs. I find a seat trying to be unobtrusive in this larger, more formal meeting of the Board.
Prior to the meeting's opening, a discussion across several tables between the President and Vice-President occurs. In answer to the President's question as to proper procedure for elections, the Vice explains the slate of members for whom they will be voting. There are the officers and then the rest of the slate. It seems that all those who are currently serving will be up for re-election. Am I hearing this correctly? It seems I do. The meeting is opened and the election passes quickly with no changes in Board membership. My name is not brought up, not even mentioned.
I'm feeling embarrassed. On my walk home, I review what has happened. Did I miss something over the last month? Should I have communicated with someone after the last meeting about my interest? It's almost as if there were a discussion prior to this meeting and a decision made.
I'm devastated. To what extent, if any, does my candidacy have on these elections? I don't know. But as several hours go by and I go over the meeting, my body begins to relax. Maybe this is just the way things work in small towns. My worries and concerns over what others might think begin to dissipate. The Board elections are no longer a problem. I'm free now, I realize, to act on my candidacy in the best way I see fit. I begin to stand straighter, pull my shoulders back, and look forward to the challenge -- until tomorrow. There are 24 hours before the deadline. There's no going back after that. Can I really do this thing?
It is now four days since I file as Democrat for State House candidacy in the red state of Montana. I have not slept well since then. I've put myself in a position in this town of pushing upstream while the current is flowing downstream. I don't know what's going to happen next.
I do know, however, that the next Sunday is the Annual Meeting of an organization for which I've been volunteering the past year. At this meeting of the Board, a decision will be made about changing Board membership for the coming year. I have been approached twice, once last fall and once this spring, by two different Board members about my interest in serving on the Board. My original reaction is uncertainty since, get this, I prefer to do the volunteer work without getting involved in the politics of the organization! Yeah, right! But when the point is made that the Board is looking for people who are interested in the organization, I quickly affirm that yes, I am very interested.
The second person to ask about my interest in Board membership invites me to visit a Board meeting this spring prior to the one in which elections will take place. She suggests that it will give me a chance to see how the Board works and decide whether or not joining it will be something I want to do. I visit that meeting, observe the group and even feel comfortable enough to participate in a discussion. This coming Sunday then are the elections. I will be attending.
I am very nervous. My filing on Monday is a secret between my daughter and myself. What if word gets out too quickly about what I've done, that I've filed for elective office as a Democrat? It might ruin my chances of being invited onto this Board. Since first being approached, my interest in serving has increased and I'm looking forward to the possibility of an invitation. I am aware that my name is already listed as a Democratic candidate on the Statewide legislative website. I check after receiving my first survey. Possibly someone on the Board has also seen that list, or has heard about it. If so, will it have an impact on whether or not I'm invited on the Board?
In my head, I run through several scenarios. My name will be brought up -- it only makes sense since I've been approached twice by different Board members. The question then is how do I respond? Do I tell them about my candidacy before the vote or just let it pass? My worry is all about how big an impact my candidacy will have on the vote.
I walk toward the building where the Board meets. One member doesn't seem to see me right away, not until I make a point of waving. Another greets me soberly, making a point of the phone message she left, thanking me for installment of a faucet in one of the building's restrooms. The meeting room is quiet as first arrivals begin arranging placement of tables and chairs. I find a seat trying to be unobtrusive in this larger, more formal meeting of the Board.
Prior to the meeting's opening, a discussion across several tables between the President and Vice-President occurs. In answer to the President's question as to proper procedure for elections, the Vice explains the slate of members for whom they will be voting. There are the officers and then the rest of the slate. It seems that all those who are currently serving will be up for re-election. Am I hearing this correctly? It seems I do. The meeting is opened and the election passes quickly with no changes in Board membership. My name is not brought up, not even mentioned.
I'm feeling embarrassed. On my walk home, I review what has happened. Did I miss something over the last month? Should I have communicated with someone after the last meeting about my interest? It's almost as if there were a discussion prior to this meeting and a decision made.
I'm devastated. To what extent, if any, does my candidacy have on these elections? I don't know. But as several hours go by and I go over the meeting, my body begins to relax. Maybe this is just the way things work in small towns. My worries and concerns over what others might think begin to dissipate. The Board elections are no longer a problem. I'm free now, I realize, to act on my candidacy in the best way I see fit. I begin to stand straighter, pull my shoulders back, and look forward to the challenge -- until tomorrow. There are 24 hours before the deadline. There's no going back after that. Can I really do this thing?
Wednesday, March 26, 2014
A Race to the Bottom
This ad appears in the March 12, 2014, issue of our small-town newspaper:
"ATTENTION SENATE DISTRICT VOTERS: Recently I have been informed by voters in Senate District 20 that my opponent Barry Usher has contacted them and told them that I had voted for Medicaid expansion. This is untrue. I did NOT vote for the expansion of Medicaid, in fact quite the contrary..."
The purpose of states' expansion of Medicaid in the Affordable Care Act is to enable those among us with the least amount of means, those earning 100 per cent below the poverty level, to receive affordable health care. They would be able to qualify for federal subsidies and thus be able to purchase health care insurance. Without Medicaid, they most probably cannot.
I can only surmise from the ad above that neither Mr. Ankney nor Mr. Usher want to be known for supporting Medicaid expansion in the Montana State Senate. Are we really seeking the lowest common denominator now in our country: see who can do the least to help those most in need?
During 2001-2003, my husband and I serve as Peace Corps Volunteers in Straldja, Bulgaria. Daily, we can see reminders of the country's poverty, particularly that of the older generation: pensioners (mostly women) who walk several miles into the country to gather twigs and branches, bundle them onto their backs, and carry them home for heat. Wheelchairs for the disabled are nowhere to be seen. Questions from pensioners always for us are about how much money we make as Americans; there is no such thing as Social Security in Bulgaria, no safety net on which to depend. There isn't a day that goes by that I don't thank my lucky stars for having been born in America.
Now I wonder. Where is our country headed if the "Party of No" continues to lead us ever downward? Efforts to trash the Affordable Care Act are only one example. Others include attacks on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, pensions built up over years of work, school lunches, Head Start, the SNAP program (providing food for working families whose wages can't meet basic needs), etc. -- many benefits about which Bulgarians are so envious. Meanwhile, there is a segment of our population that is doing very well. The Koch brothers are an example. Could people like them, the ones spending billions of dollars on GOP political races, be the reason that those running for office have lost all sense of neighborly decency, empathy, and compassion? That it's really about the almighty dollar?
Are we becoming a country known more for its poverty rather than for its plenty? Poverty in spirit as well as poverty in our own economic well-being? Is this where we are headed -- in a race toward the bottom?
This ad appears in the March 12, 2014, issue of our small-town newspaper:
"ATTENTION SENATE DISTRICT VOTERS: Recently I have been informed by voters in Senate District 20 that my opponent Barry Usher has contacted them and told them that I had voted for Medicaid expansion. This is untrue. I did NOT vote for the expansion of Medicaid, in fact quite the contrary..."
The purpose of states' expansion of Medicaid in the Affordable Care Act is to enable those among us with the least amount of means, those earning 100 per cent below the poverty level, to receive affordable health care. They would be able to qualify for federal subsidies and thus be able to purchase health care insurance. Without Medicaid, they most probably cannot.
I can only surmise from the ad above that neither Mr. Ankney nor Mr. Usher want to be known for supporting Medicaid expansion in the Montana State Senate. Are we really seeking the lowest common denominator now in our country: see who can do the least to help those most in need?
During 2001-2003, my husband and I serve as Peace Corps Volunteers in Straldja, Bulgaria. Daily, we can see reminders of the country's poverty, particularly that of the older generation: pensioners (mostly women) who walk several miles into the country to gather twigs and branches, bundle them onto their backs, and carry them home for heat. Wheelchairs for the disabled are nowhere to be seen. Questions from pensioners always for us are about how much money we make as Americans; there is no such thing as Social Security in Bulgaria, no safety net on which to depend. There isn't a day that goes by that I don't thank my lucky stars for having been born in America.
Now I wonder. Where is our country headed if the "Party of No" continues to lead us ever downward? Efforts to trash the Affordable Care Act are only one example. Others include attacks on Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, pensions built up over years of work, school lunches, Head Start, the SNAP program (providing food for working families whose wages can't meet basic needs), etc. -- many benefits about which Bulgarians are so envious. Meanwhile, there is a segment of our population that is doing very well. The Koch brothers are an example. Could people like them, the ones spending billions of dollars on GOP political races, be the reason that those running for office have lost all sense of neighborly decency, empathy, and compassion? That it's really about the almighty dollar?
Are we becoming a country known more for its poverty rather than for its plenty? Poverty in spirit as well as poverty in our own economic well-being? Is this where we are headed -- in a race toward the bottom?
Monday, March 24, 2014
HOW DID I GET HERE: Do I Really Want to Continue?
Late Monday, March 3, 2014, I file as a Democratic candidate for State House in Montana. I have been convinced by the Field Director, Montana Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, that my name is needed on the ballot in November. All it takes is completing a form from the web, emailing it back to the Office of Secretary of State, and include a $15 filing fee. Too easy. Then comes the request for a completion of two more forms. Impatient but resigned, I finish them in due course.
It's Thursday morning and the sky hasn't fallen -- yet.
I find two official-looking pieces of mail in my box. The first is from the Secretary of State, confirming that indeed I am now a candidate running for statewide office. I turn to the second one with a return stamp, officious "MONTANA" in red on the top line and, in smaller print below, "Family Institute". Uh-oh. Is it what I think? I really don't want to know but I must open it anyway.
My heart drops to my stomach when I quickly review the letter and enclosed survey. As I suspected, this survey reflects issues propounded by the right wing. Statements are framed according to how they see the world. Topics range from schools (funding of public schools, allowing charter schools and home schools and state regulation) and healthcare (Medicaid, "domestic partners", companies opting out of Obamacare, abortion) to issues around "homosexuals" and sexual orientation. It ends with three statements about taxes, one statement about the 2nd Amendment (firearms) and the last statement about global warming and increased regulation.
As is typical of right-wing thought (everything is either black or white), the greatest percentage of statements begin with shoulds: "should allow, should be allowed, should be prohibited, should be expanded, should be amended" (reminds me of our parents telling us children what we "should" do when we were little).
Examples of statements include (responses graduate from Strongly Support to Strongly Oppose): "Abortion should be prohibited in all circumstances"; "Abortion should be prohibited, except in cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is in danger". Nowhere is there a statement about a decision concerning pregnancy being made between a woman and her doctor; only that "abortion should be prohibited..." Two other examples are: "Homosexuals should be allowed to adopt children"and "Anti-discrimination laws should be expanded to protect sexual orientation in the same way that race, creed, nationality, and religion are protected". Nowhere is there an understanding that (1) children thrive in homes where there are warm and loving adults whether they are both male, both female or one of each, and (2) judging discrimination according to who people love is still discrimination. What difference does it make to any other individual who loves who?!
Government intrusion? In spades!
Oh, and if I choose not to complete the survey? This organization tells me they will go back into voting records, public statements I've made, voter guides and my party's platform to find answers. So be it.
But a groan escapes. Do I really want to put myself through this?
Late Monday, March 3, 2014, I file as a Democratic candidate for State House in Montana. I have been convinced by the Field Director, Montana Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, that my name is needed on the ballot in November. All it takes is completing a form from the web, emailing it back to the Office of Secretary of State, and include a $15 filing fee. Too easy. Then comes the request for a completion of two more forms. Impatient but resigned, I finish them in due course.
It's Thursday morning and the sky hasn't fallen -- yet.
I find two official-looking pieces of mail in my box. The first is from the Secretary of State, confirming that indeed I am now a candidate running for statewide office. I turn to the second one with a return stamp, officious "MONTANA" in red on the top line and, in smaller print below, "Family Institute". Uh-oh. Is it what I think? I really don't want to know but I must open it anyway.
My heart drops to my stomach when I quickly review the letter and enclosed survey. As I suspected, this survey reflects issues propounded by the right wing. Statements are framed according to how they see the world. Topics range from schools (funding of public schools, allowing charter schools and home schools and state regulation) and healthcare (Medicaid, "domestic partners", companies opting out of Obamacare, abortion) to issues around "homosexuals" and sexual orientation. It ends with three statements about taxes, one statement about the 2nd Amendment (firearms) and the last statement about global warming and increased regulation.
As is typical of right-wing thought (everything is either black or white), the greatest percentage of statements begin with shoulds: "should allow, should be allowed, should be prohibited, should be expanded, should be amended" (reminds me of our parents telling us children what we "should" do when we were little).
Examples of statements include (responses graduate from Strongly Support to Strongly Oppose): "Abortion should be prohibited in all circumstances"; "Abortion should be prohibited, except in cases of rape, incest, or when the life of the mother is in danger". Nowhere is there a statement about a decision concerning pregnancy being made between a woman and her doctor; only that "abortion should be prohibited..." Two other examples are: "Homosexuals should be allowed to adopt children"and "Anti-discrimination laws should be expanded to protect sexual orientation in the same way that race, creed, nationality, and religion are protected". Nowhere is there an understanding that (1) children thrive in homes where there are warm and loving adults whether they are both male, both female or one of each, and (2) judging discrimination according to who people love is still discrimination. What difference does it make to any other individual who loves who?!
Government intrusion? In spades!
Oh, and if I choose not to complete the survey? This organization tells me they will go back into voting records, public statements I've made, voter guides and my party's platform to find answers. So be it.
But a groan escapes. Do I really want to put myself through this?
Sunday, March 23, 2014
SUPPORT LUCKY-NESS. Letter to the Editor, Billings Gazette. (The following letter, I am told, is scheduled for print today, Sunday, March 23, 2014.)
I am standing at the pharmacy counter in a drugstore recently. A young man comes to the counter to drop off several prescriptions, either one or both for his wife. "Do you have insurance?" asks the druggist. "No," is the reply. I look down at the two quarters and a penny I hand to the cashier for my prescription.
I know I am lucky. I have primary and secondary healthcare policies that come through the federal government. If it weren't for that, I'd be in this young man's position -- paying full price for my medications, something I could ill afford.
I realize then that he could also get good healthcare coverage through the federal government -- with the Affordable Care Act. If he would just access the website, www.healthcare.gov., he could examine possibilities, choose a plan, and explore subsidies. Why not? Why wouldn't a person want to pay less for medications? Why wouldn't we as a country want all our citizens to have access to good health care at a reasonable price? Why, in fact, would anyone try so hard (through repeal of Obamacare 50 times!) to obstruct this young man's efforts to provide good health care for his family? Why aren't we as a country pulling together to do just the opposite and, in particular, help young people to build their own luck? Why, indeed!
I am standing at the pharmacy counter in a drugstore recently. A young man comes to the counter to drop off several prescriptions, either one or both for his wife. "Do you have insurance?" asks the druggist. "No," is the reply. I look down at the two quarters and a penny I hand to the cashier for my prescription.
I know I am lucky. I have primary and secondary healthcare policies that come through the federal government. If it weren't for that, I'd be in this young man's position -- paying full price for my medications, something I could ill afford.
I realize then that he could also get good healthcare coverage through the federal government -- with the Affordable Care Act. If he would just access the website, www.healthcare.gov., he could examine possibilities, choose a plan, and explore subsidies. Why not? Why wouldn't a person want to pay less for medications? Why wouldn't we as a country want all our citizens to have access to good health care at a reasonable price? Why, in fact, would anyone try so hard (through repeal of Obamacare 50 times!) to obstruct this young man's efforts to provide good health care for his family? Why aren't we as a country pulling together to do just the opposite and, in particular, help young people to build their own luck? Why, indeed!
Saturday, March 22, 2014
HOW DID I GET HERE: The First Risk, November, 2013
I am angry. I am frustrated. They are talking about the effect this law has on other people's lives. And they could care less!
Mid-morning, I sit down at the computer. My voice must be heard. I write, I edit, I click on the "Submit" button. My first Letter to the Editor is on its way.
Congressional hearings continue. The roll-out of the Affordable Care Act has been bungled. The "Party of No" milks the situation for all its worth. In the meantime, those without any health insurance have become pawns in their political game.
Around 1:00 pm, my phone rings. Could it be? Could it be who I think it is? "Are you the person who wrote the letter?" inquires the voice from the Billings Gazette. I'm flattered my letter draws some attention but my heart skips a beat. What have I done?
"Ye-e-e-s," I slowly admit.
"We plan to print it as soon as possible." And in my head, my voice is yelling, "No, no, no. Wait a minute! I'm not so sure I really want to do this thing. Let me think about it some more!"
Instead, my voice calmly responds, "That will be fine." And the push/pull of achieving my four goals in 2014 is off to a shaky start. I want to achieve my goals but am I truly willing to take the risks? (A similar feeling occurs in 2001 when my husband and I are accepted as Peace Corps Volunteers.)
How will the publishing of this letter affect my life? What will Roundup, my current hometown, think? This is the story of how unplanned it can be to do something so wild as to run blue for office in a red state. It can sneak up so innocuously. It happens as a result of unknowingly (on the surface anyway) planting the seed. With my first Letter to the Editor, I know something can result from it but I do it anyway. When the result comes, there's a feeling of confirmation but also of trepidation. There is happiness because my letter has been accepted but dread because I don't know how my letter will be received in Roundup. How will I be affected personally by this whole thing? (More later)
I am angry. I am frustrated. They are talking about the effect this law has on other people's lives. And they could care less!
Mid-morning, I sit down at the computer. My voice must be heard. I write, I edit, I click on the "Submit" button. My first Letter to the Editor is on its way.
Congressional hearings continue. The roll-out of the Affordable Care Act has been bungled. The "Party of No" milks the situation for all its worth. In the meantime, those without any health insurance have become pawns in their political game.
Around 1:00 pm, my phone rings. Could it be? Could it be who I think it is? "Are you the person who wrote the letter?" inquires the voice from the Billings Gazette. I'm flattered my letter draws some attention but my heart skips a beat. What have I done?
"Ye-e-e-s," I slowly admit.
"We plan to print it as soon as possible." And in my head, my voice is yelling, "No, no, no. Wait a minute! I'm not so sure I really want to do this thing. Let me think about it some more!"
Instead, my voice calmly responds, "That will be fine." And the push/pull of achieving my four goals in 2014 is off to a shaky start. I want to achieve my goals but am I truly willing to take the risks? (A similar feeling occurs in 2001 when my husband and I are accepted as Peace Corps Volunteers.)
How will the publishing of this letter affect my life? What will Roundup, my current hometown, think? This is the story of how unplanned it can be to do something so wild as to run blue for office in a red state. It can sneak up so innocuously. It happens as a result of unknowingly (on the surface anyway) planting the seed. With my first Letter to the Editor, I know something can result from it but I do it anyway. When the result comes, there's a feeling of confirmation but also of trepidation. There is happiness because my letter has been accepted but dread because I don't know how my letter will be received in Roundup. How will I be affected personally by this whole thing? (More later)
Friday, March 21, 2014
Neighbor Helping Neighbor Maybe Republicans in the current Montana Legislature could learn something from the community of Roundup. This is what Roundup citizens know about each other: they help out in times of need. Through the flood of 2011, the fires of 2012, and the flood of 2014, the community comes together with support, shelter, and provisions.
Republicans in the current Montana Legislature, on the other hand, seem to deny help when it's needed. Take, for example, healthcare insurance. This is something, one would imagine, that most if not all Montana Legislators carry. Who wouldn't want to carry insurance to encourage disease prevention and help brunt the cost of healthcare? It only makes sense to do so. But what about those who have difficulty taking care of their basic needs let alone carry healthcare insurance? Wouldn't it make sense that, given the opportunity to help those in need (those whose families' lives may depend on the health of their caregivers), the Legislature would fall all over itself to do so?
It is true that all Montana citizens can access www.healthcare.gov website and explore possible healthcare insurance plans through the Affordable Care Act. As of March 1, according to the Billings Gazette, 22,500 Montanans now have insurance through this government program. However, for those most vulnerable among us, those with the least amount of means, cannot access help through ACA. Why not? In 2013, Republicans in the Montana Legislature blocked the extension of Medicaid, reports the Gazette. Consequently,...'some 50,000 Montanans earning below 100 percent of the federal poverty level--$11,670 for a single person -- do not qualify for federal subsidies to help buy insurance and therefore probably aren't able to afford it...' It was Medicaid, in other words, that was supposed to cover this group.
Neighbor helping neighbor? Maybe that's true in the Roundup community but when it comes to Republicans in the current Montana Legislature, one cannot be so sure.
Republicans in the current Montana Legislature, on the other hand, seem to deny help when it's needed. Take, for example, healthcare insurance. This is something, one would imagine, that most if not all Montana Legislators carry. Who wouldn't want to carry insurance to encourage disease prevention and help brunt the cost of healthcare? It only makes sense to do so. But what about those who have difficulty taking care of their basic needs let alone carry healthcare insurance? Wouldn't it make sense that, given the opportunity to help those in need (those whose families' lives may depend on the health of their caregivers), the Legislature would fall all over itself to do so?
It is true that all Montana citizens can access www.healthcare.gov website and explore possible healthcare insurance plans through the Affordable Care Act. As of March 1, according to the Billings Gazette, 22,500 Montanans now have insurance through this government program. However, for those most vulnerable among us, those with the least amount of means, cannot access help through ACA. Why not? In 2013, Republicans in the Montana Legislature blocked the extension of Medicaid, reports the Gazette. Consequently,...'some 50,000 Montanans earning below 100 percent of the federal poverty level--$11,670 for a single person -- do not qualify for federal subsidies to help buy insurance and therefore probably aren't able to afford it...' It was Medicaid, in other words, that was supposed to cover this group.
Neighbor helping neighbor? Maybe that's true in the Roundup community but when it comes to Republicans in the current Montana Legislature, one cannot be so sure.
Wednesday, March 19, 2014
HOW DID I GET HERE?
It is January, 2014, and I record in my daily journal four goals I want to achieve this year:
Make hay while the sun shines
Make more friends
Make money from my writing
Make more professional connections through social media. Learn how.
Nowhere in that list (or in my head) does the idea occur of running blue for the House of Representatives in the red state of Montana. It just appears out of the blue, so to speak. But it doesn't really because I've planted the seed with my goal-setting. A willingness to take risks seems to accompany that exercise.
I believe that the Letter to the Editor, November, 2013, (in the previous post) is what brings attention to my name. On a Friday night in early March, as the filing-for-office deadline draws near, my phone rings. Before I can hang up, the request for putting my name on the November ballot comes through. I am taken aback. "I will think about it," I stutter. Another phone call on Monday from the Field Director, Montana Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, seals the decision; my name on the ballot will allow Democrats to vote for another Democrat. Because my district is not competitive, I am not expected to win and can do as little or as much campaigning as I wish.
My campaign strategy is simple:
-Research
-Write (especially Letters to the Editor), maybe create a blog
-Answer questions
It's one of the first pieces of official-looking mail that almost drives me to withdraw. (More later)
It is January, 2014, and I record in my daily journal four goals I want to achieve this year:
Make hay while the sun shines
Make more friends
Make money from my writing
Make more professional connections through social media. Learn how.
Nowhere in that list (or in my head) does the idea occur of running blue for the House of Representatives in the red state of Montana. It just appears out of the blue, so to speak. But it doesn't really because I've planted the seed with my goal-setting. A willingness to take risks seems to accompany that exercise.
I believe that the Letter to the Editor, November, 2013, (in the previous post) is what brings attention to my name. On a Friday night in early March, as the filing-for-office deadline draws near, my phone rings. Before I can hang up, the request for putting my name on the November ballot comes through. I am taken aback. "I will think about it," I stutter. Another phone call on Monday from the Field Director, Montana Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee, seals the decision; my name on the ballot will allow Democrats to vote for another Democrat. Because my district is not competitive, I am not expected to win and can do as little or as much campaigning as I wish.
My campaign strategy is simple:
-Research
-Write (especially Letters to the Editor), maybe create a blog
-Answer questions
It's one of the first pieces of official-looking mail that almost drives me to withdraw. (More later)
Tuesday, March 18, 2014
Letter to the Editor, Billings Gazette, 11/5/2013
Benefits of ACA outweigh problems
By Edith Sloan, Roundup
Unexpectedly, I learned much about the Affordable Care Act from the hearings on Oct. 30. It's probably the first time that Americans who paid attention heard detractors speak but also heard the other side of the story, the facts.
They heard Kathleen Sibelius speak with a calm voice while under pressure. They heard how the ACA is now helping Americans who previously had been unable to qualify for insurance.
And they heard actual facts given, such as the reason for insurance companies rescinding some current policies is that they were actually junk policies. It is clear that there have been initial problems with the ACA website, with some security, etc., but nothing that can't be corrected. The benefits of ACA well outweigh problems.
I appreciated hearing the facts clearly stated. Clouding the facts, spouting untruths and creating sound bites ad nauseam does nothing to help the American people; it only serves a political purpose. For shame!
Benefits of ACA outweigh problems
By Edith Sloan, Roundup
Unexpectedly, I learned much about the Affordable Care Act from the hearings on Oct. 30. It's probably the first time that Americans who paid attention heard detractors speak but also heard the other side of the story, the facts.
They heard Kathleen Sibelius speak with a calm voice while under pressure. They heard how the ACA is now helping Americans who previously had been unable to qualify for insurance.
And they heard actual facts given, such as the reason for insurance companies rescinding some current policies is that they were actually junk policies. It is clear that there have been initial problems with the ACA website, with some security, etc., but nothing that can't be corrected. The benefits of ACA well outweigh problems.
I appreciated hearing the facts clearly stated. Clouding the facts, spouting untruths and creating sound bites ad nauseam does nothing to help the American people; it only serves a political purpose. For shame!
Monday, March 17, 2014
ACA or Obamacare: According to Huffington Post (by Kevin Short, 3/5/2014), Obamacare is "actually putting money in Americans' pockets...it was responsible for about three-quarters of a surprising January rise in U.S. consumer spending and American income growth."
Why?
1. "It expanded the Medicaid program...adding up to a $19 billion dollars in benefits in January."
2. "...health care enrollees additionally received another $15 billion in the form of tax credits..."
Result:
These changes "freed up many Americans to spend money that would have gone towards health care premiums on goods and services instead."
Why?
1. "It expanded the Medicaid program...adding up to a $19 billion dollars in benefits in January."
2. "...health care enrollees additionally received another $15 billion in the form of tax credits..."
Result:
These changes "freed up many Americans to spend money that would have gone towards health care premiums on goods and services instead."
The Affordable Care Act: I click on Healthcare.gov this a.m. The website comes up immediately. I click on "Individuals and Families" since, out of curiosity, I am checking on health insurance for myself. After choosing "See plans before I apply," I answer questions. One of them asks for my age but it doesn't go any further than 64. To find out why, I choose the topic, "Get Started" and underneath, there is a "One-Page Guide to the Health Insurance Marketplace." I find that "if you have Medicare, you are considered covered and don't have to make any changes." Question answered. And if I were younger and looking for health insurance? This website provides all kinds of help, seemingly for all kinds of situations. Try it yourself. Explore. And do it all in the privacy of your own home.
Welcome
Welcome to this new blog. This is the beginning of a new journey: Running blue at 72 -- in a red state. I have filed as a Democratic candidate for State House in Montana at the age of 72.
My intention is to chronicle activities, report on issues I care about, and share my experiences. This path is not something I would have chosen but it is where I find myself. I will do my best to place an accurate spotlight not only on issues but also on the ups and downs of such a journey.
My intention is to chronicle activities, report on issues I care about, and share my experiences. This path is not something I would have chosen but it is where I find myself. I will do my best to place an accurate spotlight not only on issues but also on the ups and downs of such a journey.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)