Jefferson: “[the President will be] …A bad edition of a Polish king. He may be reelected from four years to four years for life…Once in office, and possessing the military force of the union, without either the aid or check of a council, he would not easily be dethroned, even if the people could be induced to withdraw their votes from him. I wish that at the end of the four years, they made him ever ineligible a second time.”

Adams: “You are afraid of the one, I, the few. We agree perfectly that the man should have full, fair and perfect representation [in the House]. You are apprehensive of monarchy; I, of aristocracy. I would therefore have given more power to the President and less to the Senate.”

Alone at his desk at Poplar Forest, where more than a hundred slaves labored in the fields beyond his window, Jefferson had written one of the most impassioned denunciations of his life, decrying slavery as an extreme depravity:

The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise of the most boisterous passions [Jefferson had written], the most unremitting despotism on the one part, and degrading submissions on the other. Our children see this, and learn to imitate it… The parent storms, the child looks on, catches the lineaments of wrath, puts on the same airs in the circle of smaller slaves, gives a loose to his worst passions, and thus nursed, educated, and daily exercised in tyranny, cannot but be stamped by it with odious peculiarities. The man must be a prodigy who can retain his manners and morals undepraved by such circumstances… if a slave can have a country in this world, it must be any other in preference to that in which he is to be born to live and labor for another … or entail his own miserable condition on the endless generations proceeding from him…. Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep forever.

(from David McCullough’s “John Adams”)

Watch the video to see how it all ends.

What a scene it was that night in Denver at the Mile High Stadium one year ago today. People stood in line in the hot sun for hours to get a seat…and then that evening inside the stadium, the feeling was electric. Supporters–black, white, young, old, gay, straight and every other stripe–hung on Obama’s every word. Flags waved in the humid air. Thousands jumped to their feet, holding “Change” signs above their heads. Thunderous applause roared like none I’d ever heard. Hope, hope was alive. Can we get it back?

I’m guessing most people showed up thinking all the talk was going to be about health care reform, but much more was on the agenda. Everybody who had the patience found themselves watching Rep. Danny Davis hand out awards to constituents for their service to the district. While I wasn’t expecting all that either, it was kind of heartening to see the people who actually do work hard to improve conditions for their neighbors and others in the community. One was Phyllis Logan, Community Leader of the Year, who said she never looked to be “rewarded for what your heart and soul tell you to do–that’s help people.” Davis credited Logan, a real estate agent, for giving people straight-up advice about mortgage loans and guiding them through the foreclosure crisis.

Another fact that I didn’t know was how involved Davis has been in health care issues through the years. In moving toward the discussion that everybody was waiting for, he mentioned that he taught courses on public health at the University of Illinois-Chicago and is a former president of the National Association of Community Health Centers. In some ways it felt as though he was saying that he’s seen and heard it all already. He did throw the crowd a bone of hope when he said, “We’re going to get this health thing right” this time. A few of his other lines raised hope too among those who want to knock private insurers down a notch. He said when he takes to the floor of the House to debate whatever health care bill emerges, “I will be speaking for single payer.”

Davis repeatedly acknowledged the role “politics’ plays in everything Congress touches. “We’re in an era of professional politics,” he said, promising his constituents that “the only people who really convince me are those people I represent.” We shall see.

In trying to convince him to support the public option and single payer, constituents from around the district (which covers an area larger and more irregular than I imagined) lined up behind the microphone to ask some truly informed questions, give advice, urge passage of the public option and tort reform, describe their fights with private insurers, and recount their experiences with “socialized” health care systems in countries such as Japan. (I have to say when you witness people being their most sincere and most committed to a cause, it does make you feel however briefly that change can happen.)

One woman, who looked to be 50ish, said, “I have worked every day of my life since 16…and I don’t have health insurance.” Another woman cited the “unnecessary, poor quality [health Insurance company] administrators who wouldn’t listen” when she called to discuss a claim.

For a while Davis was out of the auditorium as the speakers offered their testimonies, but he returned and sat in the front row while his aides ran the forum and recorded the questions and comments. One of the aides wanted to cut off the comments, but Davis said he would hear them out. That was the right thing to do.

It was something to hear some people tell him and other Democrats to go ahead with reform “without Republican” support. One man pointedly asked Davis: “Would you be willing to give up your gold-plated [health] plan and enroll in [a public option plan]?” To that, Davis said, he’s in a plan that he was in before he became a congressman.

A man who lived in Japan, which offers a universal health care insurance system that covers all citizens, said the U.S. “cannot afford to have the majority of the population in a situation where they’re not covered.” Another person, decrying health care costs and the government and private waste, said, “We live in a dictatorship by money.”

The most impassioned health care reform supporter I encountered was a woman I met on the street, outside the meeting site, Dr. Lora Chamberlain, a family practice physician in Chicago who patiently and clearly explained to me the difference between single payer and public option, two terms I’m sure most people haven’t parsed for themselves. She handed me a five-page letter addressed to Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.), who earlier this year replaced Rahm Emanuel in Illinois’ 5th Congressional District. Her arguments for reform were among the best I’ve heard.

Her letter says, “The Health Insurance companies are going along with the reforms of their industry in the Congressional health care bills, (such as getting rid of the pre-existing illness clauses), because they want the business from those 48 million to 50 million Americans who presently have no insurance.” Her biggest argument is that the failure to pass a public option will result in the “Massachusetts plan,” which mandates that all people buy private insurance. Since the Massachusetts plan went into effect in Spring 2006, health insurance premiums have risen 25 percent, her letter states. And the number of uninsured also has gone up, “even thought there are rising penalties for not buying health insurance.”

Her points were so well-crafted, I just have to quote a few more here:
“Our Health Care system is so fragmented, so filled with fraud and abuse, so expensive, so corrupted by Big Pharma and Health Insurance corporations that to go in the direction that we need to go in, eventually, step by step, toward a healthy Single Payer system, which is coordinated, cost effective, accountable, and responsive to citizens, we can not be increasing the power of the corporations in this bill. That is a step back and dangerous to our health!”

Amen, Dr. Lora.

Another speaker who made a lot of sense was Lynn Allen of Oak Park, who presented a list of actions she’ll like to see Congress and President Obama include in a real reform bill:
1. Congress should go forward with health care reform without the Republicans. It is obvious that they will not vote for any real reform. We have a clear Democratic majority in the House of Representatives and only need 60 votes to prevent a Republican filibuster in the Senate after which we only need 50 votes plus Vice President Biden’s vote to break a tie.
2. There must be a public option that will provide baseline health and dental maintenance, sickness and emergency services.
3. It should NOT be employer based so people will not have to fear losing their coverage if they lose their jobs. Also, this would enable people to choose their own programs rather than their employers choosing the plan for all of their employees. The most I would recommend would be to require employers to give their employees a health care allowance, which the employees can take and purchase the plan they want.
4. The plan should be open to anyone and everyone who wants to sign up. I receive a good allowance from my employer for health care, but I would like to be able to see the doctors I want. Unfortunately my eye doctor is not in my employer’s system, so I have to either go to who they want me to see or pay out of pocket to be able to see the doctor who has given me care for the past 10 years.
5. Health care reform should begin in 2010, NOT 2013.
6. There should be a standard billing procedure and standard record keeping system.
7. Have premiums based on a sliding scale based on income.
8. Citizens should be able to buy supplemental policies that cover alternative medicine procedures such as chiropractic, naprapathic, acupuncture, etc.
9. Fair payments to doctors and health care providers
10. Timely payment to doctors and health care providers
11. Elimination of duplicate tests
12. Tort reform to eliminate the need for defensive medicine
13. Active medical review board that can be consulted and also back up doctors when they have legitimately done their best and what reasonably would be expected to do, but they could not be God. This will also help control frivolous malpractice lawsuits and eliminate ridiculous and excessive sympathy awards.
14. Add health surcharges (we can afford it!) to:
a. Fast food
b. Soft drinks
c. Tobacco
d. Alcohol
e. Junk food (candy bars, chips, ice cream, etc.)
15. Bonus pay for doctors in rural areas and inner cities.
16. Medical school debt forgiveness for doctors who serve in rural areas and inner cities.
17. Formation (encouragement/incentives)of more non-profit and/or teaching hospitals where doctors are salaried (like at Mayo Clinic)

Oh, this makes so much sense.

I love these thinking women who’ve given deep and serious thought to making health care reform real and meaningful.

And they did it without a lot of shouting. Brains before brawn is the way to go.

Are you listening, Mr. Davis, Mr. Obama?

America’s talking–and will be voting when the time comes.

Telling a historical narrative in the present tense is a device often used on a PBS show that I enjoy, called the History Detectives. And one of my favorite historians, Doris Kearns Goodwin does has done it often when she is was a guest or was being interviewed on TV, the news or in a documentary. She’s a peach, and I think maybe she does has done it to give the impression of history and the past being a living thing. Which it is not. Is the device a way to make history seem more accessible for people who generally have no interest in history?

I remember one day, I’m watching TV and I even hear the master, David McCullough doing it!

Does that mean that I was (am?) doing the remembering and the watching on the same day?

Something like this, for example: “…and Lincoln travels to the sacred battlefield and delivers his famous Gettysburg Address.”

Well, it wasn’t sacred or famous yet when he delivered it.

And what if Lincoln wrote the address this way (with my my changes in red italics):

“Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought bring forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal…

“…But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate — we can not consecrate — we can not hallow — this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled struggle here, have consecrated consecrate it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did do here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought fight here have thus far so nobly advanced advance. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us — that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave give the last full measure of devotion — that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died die in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom — and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

Those few changes and it makes no sense at all. And yet I hear have heard modern historians talking talk this way all the time, and I think thought it is was confusing.

Now I am far from the world’s finest grammarian, but see what I mean?