Someone who cares...NOT

"If you are going to have psychiatric problems at least do it around someone who gives a shit."  I witnessed this understandable, if callous reaction to someone who has gone through 5 years of hell. The person reacting that way was somehow related to a Congressman who lived in that neighborhood. She was riding a bicycle towing a little trailer with a child in it also in a bicycle helmet so I couldn't tell who she was. Her bitchiness was obviously directed at my friend since there was no one close enough for her statement to be directed at anyone else. My friend understands her lack of compassion, she has felt that way about HERSELF. In fact, she states quite often that no one can be harder on her than she is herself.

For the past year she had been receiving excellent care from Easter Seals. Her life had stabilized and was told she didn't need individual therapy any longer. She has  not been quite in agreement with that but agreed that the worst appeared to be over. The problem is that she has begun having new symptoms: inability to put more than one sentence together that makes any sense. It has her quite frightened. She has some others alarming symptoms too. Then last week she received a letter from the DHS that SNAP and Medicaid were closing her case. The questions abound: Why close it now? Is there any connection to the date of October 1st which is also the day the Marketplace starts accepting applications?  Whatever the case, she has some serious physical illness as well as the Bi-Polar, PTSD and major depression.  She is now even more frightened that she was a year ago. When she gets frightened her Bi-Polar kicks in. Yesterday she had a barium swallow test and they showed her the x-ray - quite clearly there was fluid of some type above her stomach.  It is NOT supposed to be there. She also has trouble swallowing.  So she is afraid of being ill without health insurance until.
January1st. 

The reason the case was closed on her was, it turned out was because her SSDI was also being closed out. She has to go to a hearing and to apply again. She already had a meeting with her case worker's boss and he talked so fast her head was spinning. She was told to sign a report and never gave her the chance to read it before signing. She suspects that it was a waiver of the full hearing. It just seems wrong.  If the hearing DOES take place she will be at a distinct disadvantage given her problem with her speech AND not knowing  anyone who could be her advocate. 

So she is afraid again. We are both afraid what will happen with her SSDI. Even on SSDI and on Medicaid she will be below the poverty line and unable to get the medical care she needs. Nor will she be able to afford to get her 12 medications which comes to a LOT of money without Medicaid. Her fears are very real. And neither of us knows what will happen.  

Maybe she doesn't give a ** either.

Dear GOP

What do you want of me? I am poor and unemployed and disabled. I have been unemployed since 2009, have been unable to find a job and the stress from this, my finances, my mother's health and the loss of my own access to health care finally took their toll. I crashed emotionally and became very depressed and suicidal.  I did not have insurance so I was afraid to seek help but I did anyway. I was referred to Easter Seals where I received help applying for Social Security and Medicaid/SNAP. When these were approved, I had my diagnoses and appropriate treatment begun, my life started to even out. I now know that I am Bi-Polar, suffer from major-depression and have a mild form of autism. It was the autism which caused my problems in work environments but I didn't know that for most of my life. Now that I do, my life makes far more sense and I know what I can and cannot do. Most work settings are NOT appropriate for me.

Just as I got my life in order, I started hearing things like, "GOP seeks to cut Social Security", "GOP seeks cuts to SNAP" "Michigan GOP blocks Medicaid Expansion".  Exactly what do you want from people like me? You have no problem continuing tax breaks for the wealthiest 1% but people like me are expected to fall through the now tattered and torn social "safety net." While the wealthy live high on the hog, the poor, the elderly and the disabled are expected to just go away.  Each and every day you make it more difficult for us to get help. You seem to prefer if 1 out of every 6 people in this country go hungry. Somehow you think it wrong that the unemployed receive the benefits we need to survive. You seem to prefer if 45 million Americans go without health insurance. It is better, in your minds, that the poor, elderly and disabled face hunger, hopelessness and homelessness than the wealthy be asked to pay one more cent in taxes. The logic and morality of that stance eludes me. It certainly isn't consistent with the preaching and life of the Jesus you all seem fond of in the abstract. Jesus healed the sick and fed the hungry. He overturned the tables of the moneychangers in the temple. He told the rich young man to give away everything in order to be able to follow him. The Jesus of the Bible doesn't seem to be the Jesus of the GOP or Tea Party.

None of what you say or do about those in need makes any sense to me. If the unemployed receive what we need to survive then money would go back into the economy and more jobs would be created. If the poor receive SNAP, once again, not only do we eat (and therefore do not get sick and create pressure on the health system) but we also buy food and help to create jobs and help the economy. If  45 million Americans have health insurance then we will not need to use the more expensive emergency rooms for routine illnesses. These alternatives make far more sense but who am I to question your ability or motives?

I am a citizen who votes, one who participates in the electoral process. I am not like your corporate handlers who buy their way to power. But your wealthy friends and you do not represent America.  The United States is better than your limited vision.  America can stretch further than you can see. We can take care of one another and we will, in spite of you and without your narrow point of view.

"Entitlements"

Much of the debate about the budget and deficit has centered around an attempt to cut Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. While the debate is controversial, the language used in the debate (on both sides) is incorrect. Social Security Medicare and Medicaid are NOT "entitlements".  We need to be more precise in how we speak about this issue. The language we choose to use is reflected in our politics and politics tends to distort. To be clear about the language can inform the politics, or so we hope.

The word "entitlement" comes from the French word "intitulare" ( to give a name to, to entitle) and the Latin "titulus" (distinction, claim to fame, honor, title) [myEtymology: http://bit.ly/16zxSpJ,  4 April 2013] Thus, the original meaning of the word is "to give a title". In this sense Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid are clearly not entitlements. There are no entitlements in the United States in the original sense of the word, which refers to giving a title of nobility to someone.

The Constitution of the United States says this: "No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign " (Article I, Section 9).  Entitlements don't exist here, therefore Social Security/Medicare are not entitlements.

The word, however, is most commonly used this way: "the right to guaranteed benefits under a government program, as Social Security ..." (Dictionary.com: http://bit.ly/Zel0Gl; 4 April 2013). Even this definition is incorrect.  Social Security and Medicare not guaranteed benefits nor are they good deeds or gifts, per se, but earned benefits into which we pay our entire working lives.

The word "benefit" comes from the Latin, "benefactum" (good deed). Though Social Security and Medicare can, I suppose, be considered to be good deeds because they help people in their old age and disability, they are not good deeds in the sense of unearned gifts. We do not normally pay for a good deed.  Indeed, we work very hard and pay into all three, as we pay for health insurance or life insurance. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are best to be understood as "insurance programs" which ensure our well-being through pre-paid policies or taxes. If we speak of this trio of programs this way perhaps we would be less hasty about making cuts.

It is easy to talk about cutting a program which is a good deed or unearned gift but not so easy when we speak of cutting insurance programs. Indeed, most of the time, the government is very harsh with companies which do not fund their pension programs fully. If companies are forced to do what is right with their employees pensions (which ARE usually GIVEN),  how much more should the government fully fund Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid? 

The bottom line is this: say what you mean and mean what you say.