On the importance of disagreement

The beginning of thought is in disagreement - not only with others but also with ourselves. –Eric Hoffer Honest disagreement is often a good sign of progress. –Mohandas Gandhi Greetings all! I would like to introduce myself. My name is Brynn, and I'll be joining the fantastic stable of authors at Dangerous Intersection. I'm flattered that Erich asked me to be a part of what is being built here. Lots of very talented people are contributing their thoughts to the ongoing discussion generated on various topics, and I'm honored to be a part of that. I’ve been a regular reader of DI for about a year, and I’ve been impressed with the quality posts as well as the engaging discussion that often occurs in the comments following the post. One thing that is never shied away from is disagreement. Nor should disagreement be avoided. There is no party line here, there is no heresy. What is abundant is the type of quality discussion and debate that is the hallmark of a vigorous, open community.

Too often in contemporary American society, honest debate is stifled. Politicians have learned to speak in sound bites. Media commentators have learned to present insipid and truncated stories to a largely passive and apathetic audience. The constraints of time or column inches prevent a lengthy examination of any given issue. Talking points are adopted by the major parties’ respective constituencies as though they were absolute truth. The vehemence with which one holds an opinion has become a substitute for thoughtful reflection on the reasons why one holds an opinion.

This must change. The staggering array of challenges that face us demand a well-informed and engaged citizenry . . .

Continue ReadingOn the importance of disagreement

Support the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2009

Early this week, Representatives Ed Markey and Anna Eshoo introduced the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2009. It's common sense and it's fair, but just watch as the telecoms now do everything they can to destroy it. Why do we need this Act? Here are a few recent examples:

The issue of unrestricted Internet access has gained new traction on Capitol Hill in the wake of reports that Apple and AT&T are each blocking or preventing users from accessing services for the mega-popular iPhone, which is exclusive to AT&T at the moment. FCC chairman Julius Genachowski recently sent letters to Apple, AT&T, and Google asking why Google Voice, the company's popular free calling service, was rejected for use on the iPhone.

Representatives Markey and Eshoo made this statement about the need for this net neutrality bill:

The Internet is a success today because it was open to everyone with an idea,” said Rep. Markey. “That openness and freedom has been at risk since the Supreme Court decision in Brand X. This bill will protect consumers and content providers because it will restore the guarantee that one does not have to ask permission to innovate. The Internet has thrived and revolutionized business and the economy precisely because it started as an open technology,” Rep. Eshoo said. “This bill will ensure that the non-discriminatory framework that allows the Internet to thrive and competition on the Web to flourish is preserved at a time when our economy needs it the most.”

Here's a summary of the bill:

H.R. 3458, the Internet Freedom Preservation Act, is designed to assess and promote Internet freedom for consumers and content providers. The bill states that it is the policy of the United States to protect the right of consumers to access lawful content, run lawful applications, and use lawful services of their choice on the Internet while preserving and promoting the open and interconnected nature of broadband networks, enabling consumers to connect to such networks their choice of lawful devices, as long as such devices do not harm the network. The legislation also directs the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to promulgate several rules relating to enforcement and implementation of the legislation, including rules to ensure that providers of Internet access service fulfill the duties and disclose meaningful information to consumers about a provider’s Internet access service in clear, uniform, and conspicuous manner.

To do your part, click on this tool to determine the phone number of your representative, then call to ask for his or her position on this bill. You are then given a further option to report the result to Free Press/Save the Internet. I made the call and spoke directly with a legislative assistant. She didn't know the answer (re Representative Russ Carnahan), but promised to find out and report back to me. The entire process only took a couple minutes. You can also sign a Petition that will be delivered to Congress by visiting Save the Internet. Again, it only takes a minute. Your grass roots investment of a few minutes can counteract tens of millions of dollars the telecoms will spend on lobbyists, misleading media campaigns and wads of cash that the are putting into the palms of your elected representatives. Be empowered!

Continue ReadingSupport the Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2009

Another ill-informed conservative argument on health care reform

Caroline Baum, a columnist for Bloomberg News, had this to say in an August 12 column about health care reform:

Take the issue of a public option. How can the private insurance industry survive with a not-for-profit government plan charging a pittance?
Ms. Baum has overlooked some basic facts that would undermine this claim. Namely, in America, there are public universities competing with private universities, public hospitals competing with private hospitals, public libraries competing with private bookstores, and a public post office competing with private package delivery companies. To cite an even more obvious example, there are already public, not-for-profit government plans like Medicare competing with private insurers. Even in Europe, where most countries already offer universal public health coverage, private insurers still operate. In none of these instances has the public alternative put private competitors out of business. Why on earth would this suddenly change if the U.S. Congress created a public health insurance option?

Continue ReadingAnother ill-informed conservative argument on health care reform

Rep. Anthony Weiner: Why do we need health insurers at all?

New York Representative Anthony Weiner is my new hero. It's clearly time for a single payor system and it appears that progressives are finally getting the courage to speak up for it. There is no rationality in a system that syphons health care dollars off as profits to big insurance corporations. Kudos to Rachel Maddow for prominently featuring this issue.

Continue ReadingRep. Anthony Weiner: Why do we need health insurers at all?

Tobacco money at work at Congress

When a product kills 450,000 Americans every year, don't you think it deserves a high level of scrutiny and regulation? I mean, aren't you a bit surprised that it's even illegal, given that marijuana, which kills nobody (except due to insanely reactionary law enforcement), is completely outlawed? Consider that the bodies of the people killed by tobacco every year would stretch more than 500 miles, if laid end to end. Every one of those dead people were using tobacco products exactly as anticipated by the manufacturers. Those dead bodies could stretch from New York City to Charlotte, North Carolina (or pick your own 500 mile radius). Can you imagine the tobacco executives walking along one of those 500 mile lines of dead bodies, justifying the carnage? Walking, whistling and thinking, "Just look at all of those people who were dumb enough to buy that highly addictive product that I promoted and sold . . ." And now consider the morals of some of our politicians. Step forward, Senators who oppose the new law that subjects tobacco to FDA regulation. Thanks to McClatchy Newspapers, we know that many of you are tobacco whores:

Among the 17 senators who voted against allowing the Food and Drug Administration to regulate tobacco are some of the top recipients of campaign contributions from the tobacco industry, which has donated millions of dollars to lawmakers in the past several campaign cycles.

If you want more details who which tobacco whore has received how much money, visit OpenSecrets.org. Consider, too, that the corruption that exists with regard to tobacco, also exists with regard to any major industry. For instance, consider health care, defense contracting, farming (including wasteful corn ethanol subsidies), and last but not least, the financial "services" industries. Serving themselves to our tax-dollars. Now I'm not for outlawing tobacco. But I am for unleashing a torrent of high-profile prime-time advertising that would show the death and destruction caused by tobacco up close and in nauseating detail. And I am for allowing the FDA to join in the war against smoking. Why? Consider this comment from Dick Durbin from a report by MSNBC:

"This is a bill that will protect children and will protect America," said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., a leading supporter. "Every day that we don't act, 3,500 American kids — children — will light up for the first time. That is enough to fill 70 school buses."

Continue ReadingTobacco money at work at Congress