Just for the record, I am "on vacation" from the job-I-love-that-pays-my-mortgage ... NOT "on vacation" from life or from caring about what happens to health care in this country.
I gotta tell ya -- (and yes, I realize I am quoting one of my favorite bishops) -- when we got back into cable-tv range and I flipped on the news and read Sarah Palin's latest rot-gut-baldface-lies about "Obama's death panels" ... well, let's just say it did nothing good for my blood pressure but lots for my resolve to get out there and be part of the solution to this decades old problem of screwed up health care in this country.
And clearly I'm not alone in the "fed up with the lies/time to get our voices out there" department:
The Episcopal Church is "on record" on this issue ... passing these two resolutions in Anaheim:
C071: Health Care Coverage for All
D048: Adoption of a "Single Payer" Universal Health Care Program
Read them. Mark them. Inwardly digest them. Forward them to your congressional representative. Write a Letter to the Editor. Show up at a Town Hall meeting. LET'S GET IT DONE!!
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Part Three of "Road Trip 2009"
While I am still "on" vacation, we are now back "from" vacation -- home from the 10 day road trip Louise and I took to visit her family in Colorado.It was one of those rare-but-wonderful trips where we had good car, traffic, weather AND relative karma.
If you missed Part One or Part Two, you can click on the links and catch up.
Here's Part Three of Three: a little window into that "chosen lifestyle" that seems to be such a worry in some parts. Enjoy!
And now I'm home for a few days and then off to Bowling Green KY (without Louise who's back to work today) to visit my two boys for a long weekend ... and then some more R&R here at Chez Brooks-Russell before I'm back in the office August 24th.
Grace abounds.
.
Monday, August 10, 2009
I'm back ...
... and digging through email while the laundry washes and drys as we're getting organized to go to our local "town hall meeting on health care" tomorrow night in Alhambra.
So if you're interested in letting YOUR congressional representative know what the Episcopal Church said about health care reform at our General Convention, bookmark this one.
Resolution: D048
Title: Adoption of a "Single Payer" Universal Health Care Program
Topic: Health Care
Committee: 09 - National and International Concerns
House of Initial Action: Deputies
Proposer: The Rev. Gary Commins
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, the House of Bishops concurring, That the 76th Convention of the Episcopal Church urge passage of federal legislation establishing a "single payer" universal health care program which would provide health care coverage for all of the people of the United States; and be it further
Resolved, That the General Convention direct the Office of Government Relations to assess, negotiate, and deliberate the range of proposed federal health care policy options in the effort to reach the goal of universal health care coverage, and to pursue short-term, incremental, innovative, and creative approaches to universal health care until a "single payer" universal health care program is established; and be it further
Resolved, That the Episcopal Church shall work with other people of good will to finally and concretely realize the goal of universal health care coverage; and be it further
Resolved, That church members and the Office of Government Relations communicate the position of the Episcopal Church on this issue to the President and Members of Congress, and advocate passage of legislation consistent with this resolution.
EXPLANATION
The Episcopal Church, along with several other denominations in the National Council of Churches, previously called upon the Congress and the President to ensure universal access to health care for all people in the United States by the end of 2006.
That deadline has now passed, and the situation is worse than ever. More than 47 million people in the U. S. are currently without health insurance, more than 75 million went without for some length of time within the last two years, and millions more have inadequate coverage or are at risk of losing coverage. People of color, immigrants and women are denied care at disproportionate rates, while the elderly and many others must choose between necessities and life sustaining drugs and care. Unorganized workers have either no or inadequate coverage. The Institute of Medicine has found that each year more than 18,000 in the U. S. die because they had no health insurance.
While we in the United States spend more than twice as much of our gross domestic product as other developed nations on health care ($7,129 per capita), we remain the only industrialized country without universal coverage, and the United States performs poorly in comparison on major health indicators such as life expectancy, infant mortality and immunization rates.
Almost one-third (31 percent) of the money spent on health care in the United States goes to administrative costs. Single-payer financing is the best way to recapture this wasted money. The potential savings on paperwork, more than $350 billion per year, are enough to provide comprehensive coverage to everyone without paying any more than we already do.
Under a single-payer system, all Americans would be covered for all medically necessary services, including: doctor, hospital, long-term care, mental health, dental, vision, prescription drug and medical supply costs. Patients would regain free choice of doctor and hospital, and doctors would regain autonomy over patient care.
Physicians would be paid fee-for-service according to a negotiated formulary or receive salary from a hospital or nonprofit HMO / group practice. Hospitals would receive a global budget for operating expenses. Health facilities and expensive equipment purchases would be managed by regional health planning boards.
A single-payer system would be financed by eliminating private insurers and recapturing their administrative waste. Modest new taxes would replace premiums and out-of-pocket payments currently paid by individuals and business. Costs would be controlled through negotiated fees, global budgeting and bulk purchasing.
So if you're interested in letting YOUR congressional representative know what the Episcopal Church said about health care reform at our General Convention, bookmark this one.
Resolution: D048
Title: Adoption of a "Single Payer" Universal Health Care Program
Topic: Health Care
Committee: 09 - National and International Concerns
House of Initial Action: Deputies
Proposer: The Rev. Gary Commins
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resolved, the House of Bishops concurring, That the 76th Convention of the Episcopal Church urge passage of federal legislation establishing a "single payer" universal health care program which would provide health care coverage for all of the people of the United States; and be it further
Resolved, That the General Convention direct the Office of Government Relations to assess, negotiate, and deliberate the range of proposed federal health care policy options in the effort to reach the goal of universal health care coverage, and to pursue short-term, incremental, innovative, and creative approaches to universal health care until a "single payer" universal health care program is established; and be it further
Resolved, That the Episcopal Church shall work with other people of good will to finally and concretely realize the goal of universal health care coverage; and be it further
Resolved, That church members and the Office of Government Relations communicate the position of the Episcopal Church on this issue to the President and Members of Congress, and advocate passage of legislation consistent with this resolution.
EXPLANATION
The Episcopal Church, along with several other denominations in the National Council of Churches, previously called upon the Congress and the President to ensure universal access to health care for all people in the United States by the end of 2006.
That deadline has now passed, and the situation is worse than ever. More than 47 million people in the U. S. are currently without health insurance, more than 75 million went without for some length of time within the last two years, and millions more have inadequate coverage or are at risk of losing coverage. People of color, immigrants and women are denied care at disproportionate rates, while the elderly and many others must choose between necessities and life sustaining drugs and care. Unorganized workers have either no or inadequate coverage. The Institute of Medicine has found that each year more than 18,000 in the U. S. die because they had no health insurance.
While we in the United States spend more than twice as much of our gross domestic product as other developed nations on health care ($7,129 per capita), we remain the only industrialized country without universal coverage, and the United States performs poorly in comparison on major health indicators such as life expectancy, infant mortality and immunization rates.
Almost one-third (31 percent) of the money spent on health care in the United States goes to administrative costs. Single-payer financing is the best way to recapture this wasted money. The potential savings on paperwork, more than $350 billion per year, are enough to provide comprehensive coverage to everyone without paying any more than we already do.
Under a single-payer system, all Americans would be covered for all medically necessary services, including: doctor, hospital, long-term care, mental health, dental, vision, prescription drug and medical supply costs. Patients would regain free choice of doctor and hospital, and doctors would regain autonomy over patient care.
Physicians would be paid fee-for-service according to a negotiated formulary or receive salary from a hospital or nonprofit HMO / group practice. Hospitals would receive a global budget for operating expenses. Health facilities and expensive equipment purchases would be managed by regional health planning boards.
A single-payer system would be financed by eliminating private insurers and recapturing their administrative waste. Modest new taxes would replace premiums and out-of-pocket payments currently paid by individuals and business. Costs would be controlled through negotiated fees, global budgeting and bulk purchasing.
Thursday, August 06, 2009
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
One from the road
Yes, we're having a wonderful time.
Yes, it's good to be away.
And yes, for the most part I've been focused on things nature, family and R&R rather than "things Anglican."
However ...
I'm doing some email checking at the internet cafe in Basalt CO and just couldn't pass up the chance to post this L.A. Times editorial ... just in case you missed it.
And now, back to my regularly scheduled vacation!
===
The Episcopal Church and gays
The Episcopal Church's support for gays and lesbians reaches far beyond religion to touch society.
August 2, 2009
With a little more than 2 million members, the Episcopal Church of the United States is far from being the country's largest Christian denomination. But its recent pronouncements indicating support for openly gay bishops and church blessings for same-sex couples will have reverberations beyond that church, beyond Christianity and even beyond religion. For all the theological issues it raises, acceptance of gays and lesbians at the altar reflects -- and affects -- the campaign for equality in the larger society.
Meeting last month in Anaheim, the General Convention of the denomination approved two resolutions that will widen the split between the U.S. branch of Anglicanism and many of the other 43 churches worldwide that trace their roots to the Church of England. One resolution calls for a "renewed pastoral response from this church, and for an open process for the consideration of theological and liturgical resources for the blessing of same-gender relationships." The other affirms that God has called gays and lesbians to "any ordained ministry in the Episcopal Church."
In a letter to Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori called the ordination resolution "more descriptive than prescriptive," and said it didn't repudiate a 2006 call by the U.S. church for bishops to "exercise restraint by not consenting to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to wider strains on communion." She made similar assurances about the resolution on same-sex blessings.
But the U.S. church's latest pronouncements will further inflame the furor that broke out after the 2003 consecration in New Hampshire of Bishop V. Gene Robinson, an openly gay priest in a committed same-sex relationship. After the latest votes by the U.S. church, Williams spoke of a "two-track” Anglican Communion, in which the worldwide church would have a looser relationship with regional churches that went their own way on matters such as the ordination of openly gay priests.
Actually, Episcopalians already have seen an acrimonious parting of the ways between the national church and bishops and faithful who have aligned themselves with churches in Africa and South America that have more conservative (and in some cases crude) views about human sexuality.
One could dismiss the fissure in the Anglican Communion as a purely internal matter that turns on theological issues of little import to non-Anglicans or non-Christians, such as whether the church's policy toward homosexuality should be guided by Jesus' seeming lack of interest in the subject or the condemnations of homosexuality in the Old Testament and the writings of St. Paul. Why should nonbelievers care about this dispute any more than they do about abstruse intra-Christian debates on church structure, predestination or whether the Bible should be read literally?
It isn't breaching the wall of separation between church and state to observe that evolving attitudes within a religious group, regardless of their theological aspects, often parallel views of right conduct and belief in the wider society. Consider equality for women. It would be silly to argue that the Episcopal Church's decision in 1976 to ordain women as priests, which alienated Anglicans in other countries as well as the Roman Catholic Church, was unrelated to gains women in the United States had achieved in secular settings.
In a society that has accepted women as judges, chief executive officers and university presidents, the absence of women at the altar will strike the man -- and woman -- in the pew as increasingly incongruous. The influence works both ways: A young girl who sees a woman presiding over the most sacred rituals of her faith will wonder why there is still resistance to full participation by her gender in earthly activities. A devout gay teenager who is confirmed by a homosexual bishop will be less likely to doubt his worth when confronted with bigotry and bullying at school.
This doesn't mean that religious organizations are obliged to adopt every innovation of the larger society, and obviously many don't. In supporting civil marriage for same-sex couples, this page has pointed out that legislation allowing such unions in no way jeopardizes the rights of churches to define religious marriage. They are as free to limit sacramental marriage to heterosexual couples as the Roman Catholic Church is to confine priesthood to men, despite civil rights laws prohibiting sex discrimination in employment.
As long as the 1st Amendment is in the Constitution, religious groups will be able to define their theology and their worship as they please, excluding from the pulpit not just women and gays but members of racial minorities as well. Although it can take repugnant forms, such freedom is one of the glories of this country.
Still, it's not surprising that the controversy in the Anglican Communion has riveted observers who never have darkened the door of a church. It isn't just that the dispute about homosexuality influences and informs similar debates in developed countries, including Britain and the United States. There is also a global dimension to the controversy.
In Nigeria, for example, Anglicans see themselves as competing for souls with Muslims who abhor homosexuality. As one Nigerian academic put it: "Homosexuality is not our culture. It may be allowed in the West, but here you will lose your flock."
Similar attitudes have complicated efforts by Western governments -- including the United States in Afghanistan -- to promote equality for women. As with homophobia, archaic attitudes toward women may be rooted in culture as much as in Scripture.
The strides made by the Episcopal Church thus are especially significant, and especially commendable, because they occur against a backdrop of both cultural and religious resistance. Supporters of Proposition 8 weren't the only ones to cloak prejudice with piety.
Yes, it's good to be away.
And yes, for the most part I've been focused on things nature, family and R&R rather than "things Anglican."
However ...
I'm doing some email checking at the internet cafe in Basalt CO and just couldn't pass up the chance to post this L.A. Times editorial ... just in case you missed it.
And now, back to my regularly scheduled vacation!
===
The Episcopal Church and gays
The Episcopal Church's support for gays and lesbians reaches far beyond religion to touch society.
August 2, 2009
With a little more than 2 million members, the Episcopal Church of the United States is far from being the country's largest Christian denomination. But its recent pronouncements indicating support for openly gay bishops and church blessings for same-sex couples will have reverberations beyond that church, beyond Christianity and even beyond religion. For all the theological issues it raises, acceptance of gays and lesbians at the altar reflects -- and affects -- the campaign for equality in the larger society.
Meeting last month in Anaheim, the General Convention of the denomination approved two resolutions that will widen the split between the U.S. branch of Anglicanism and many of the other 43 churches worldwide that trace their roots to the Church of England. One resolution calls for a "renewed pastoral response from this church, and for an open process for the consideration of theological and liturgical resources for the blessing of same-gender relationships." The other affirms that God has called gays and lesbians to "any ordained ministry in the Episcopal Church."
In a letter to Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori called the ordination resolution "more descriptive than prescriptive," and said it didn't repudiate a 2006 call by the U.S. church for bishops to "exercise restraint by not consenting to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to wider strains on communion." She made similar assurances about the resolution on same-sex blessings.
But the U.S. church's latest pronouncements will further inflame the furor that broke out after the 2003 consecration in New Hampshire of Bishop V. Gene Robinson, an openly gay priest in a committed same-sex relationship. After the latest votes by the U.S. church, Williams spoke of a "two-track” Anglican Communion, in which the worldwide church would have a looser relationship with regional churches that went their own way on matters such as the ordination of openly gay priests.
Actually, Episcopalians already have seen an acrimonious parting of the ways between the national church and bishops and faithful who have aligned themselves with churches in Africa and South America that have more conservative (and in some cases crude) views about human sexuality.
One could dismiss the fissure in the Anglican Communion as a purely internal matter that turns on theological issues of little import to non-Anglicans or non-Christians, such as whether the church's policy toward homosexuality should be guided by Jesus' seeming lack of interest in the subject or the condemnations of homosexuality in the Old Testament and the writings of St. Paul. Why should nonbelievers care about this dispute any more than they do about abstruse intra-Christian debates on church structure, predestination or whether the Bible should be read literally?
It isn't breaching the wall of separation between church and state to observe that evolving attitudes within a religious group, regardless of their theological aspects, often parallel views of right conduct and belief in the wider society. Consider equality for women. It would be silly to argue that the Episcopal Church's decision in 1976 to ordain women as priests, which alienated Anglicans in other countries as well as the Roman Catholic Church, was unrelated to gains women in the United States had achieved in secular settings.
In a society that has accepted women as judges, chief executive officers and university presidents, the absence of women at the altar will strike the man -- and woman -- in the pew as increasingly incongruous. The influence works both ways: A young girl who sees a woman presiding over the most sacred rituals of her faith will wonder why there is still resistance to full participation by her gender in earthly activities. A devout gay teenager who is confirmed by a homosexual bishop will be less likely to doubt his worth when confronted with bigotry and bullying at school.
This doesn't mean that religious organizations are obliged to adopt every innovation of the larger society, and obviously many don't. In supporting civil marriage for same-sex couples, this page has pointed out that legislation allowing such unions in no way jeopardizes the rights of churches to define religious marriage. They are as free to limit sacramental marriage to heterosexual couples as the Roman Catholic Church is to confine priesthood to men, despite civil rights laws prohibiting sex discrimination in employment.
As long as the 1st Amendment is in the Constitution, religious groups will be able to define their theology and their worship as they please, excluding from the pulpit not just women and gays but members of racial minorities as well. Although it can take repugnant forms, such freedom is one of the glories of this country.
Still, it's not surprising that the controversy in the Anglican Communion has riveted observers who never have darkened the door of a church. It isn't just that the dispute about homosexuality influences and informs similar debates in developed countries, including Britain and the United States. There is also a global dimension to the controversy.
In Nigeria, for example, Anglicans see themselves as competing for souls with Muslims who abhor homosexuality. As one Nigerian academic put it: "Homosexuality is not our culture. It may be allowed in the West, but here you will lose your flock."
Similar attitudes have complicated efforts by Western governments -- including the United States in Afghanistan -- to promote equality for women. As with homophobia, archaic attitudes toward women may be rooted in culture as much as in Scripture.
The strides made by the Episcopal Church thus are especially significant, and especially commendable, because they occur against a backdrop of both cultural and religious resistance. Supporters of Proposition 8 weren't the only ones to cloak prejudice with piety.
Monday, August 03, 2009
Friday, July 31, 2009
On the road
We're off on a road trip to Colorado to visit family ... Denver via Aspen and then home through Vegas. ("The Lion King" ... Whoopee!)
Blogging will therefore be sporadic ... but do keep an eye on the dioceses of Minnesota and Los Angeles ... both due to announce their slate of candidates for episcopal elections in the next few days. And keep ALL who discern God's call for ministry in your prayers ... that the gospel might be served and that all who seek a place at the table will find God's abundant love and welcome made known by this church that is the Body of Christ on earth!
And now, hi-ho, hi-ho ... it's off on vacation we go!
.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)