|
|
|
| A Larger View |
|
A Bi-Monthly Newsletter of the Inner Outer Partnership |
| Volume VIII Edition 1 |
January/February |
2003 |
War With Iraq:
The Need For Patience
As the political drums of war come closer and become louder, an
anti-war movement is growing within the U.S. and abroad. To be effective,
to better act as a constraint upon the agenda of those who seek war or
revenge or whatever motivation lays behind initiating military action, we
ought to understand the role of patience.
The obvious reason is of course the position of the Bush administration and its continuous pressure in making a case for war, an attitude which may
appease those who place regime change above disarmament, but is not
constructive. The current emphases seem to be erected to overlook that the
inspections under the current UN mandate are a time consuming, laborious
process which experts tell us is likely to take two to three years. Those
same experts also tell us that to be truly successful there has to be an
element of luck or serendipity, and remind us that several years ago it was
an obscure and easily forgotten fact that led the inspectors to discover
the existence of weapons of mass destruction. As the story goes, the
inspectors noticed that Iraq was importing huge quantities of agar, the
same agar that is used for growing cultures in petri dishes. They asked,
of course, why such large quantities were being ordered, and were told it
was for the manufacture of fertilizer. They then calculated that had that
been so, the amount ordered would last several centuries. It was obvious
there had to be another explanation and the ensuing process of deduction,
research, logic and patience led them to uncover the presence of
biological and chemical weapons. We have every reason to believe that
things are not substantially different now and the same assiduity will be
required. Iraq is proclaiming it is rid of any such weapons, and even
assuming that Saddam Hussein would like nothing better than George W. Bush
to end up with egg on his face and be proven wrong in the eyes of the
world, to verify or uncover the needed evidence does take time,
determination, persistence and probably coincidences to ascertain the
truth or falsity of the assertion.
Too, in our understanding of the need for patience, we ought to
capitalize on the paradox of the Bush administration, that while it heats
up the public stance, the political reality may be that war may not lead to
re-election. Much may not go according to plan. For example, like Osama
bin Laden Saddam Hussein may prove elusive. In addition, the American
offensive is said to undoubtedly set the stage for the recruitment of
thousands of potential terrorists, thus perhaps creating a danger larger
than the existing weapons.
The media, under pressure to report the daily activities of the
inspectors as well as the reaction of various countries involved,
frequently ends up by omitting to put the work of the inspectors in
context of the whole process. The effect is that we are subjected to a
blitz of rhetoric and suspicions often part of a strategy to sway public
opinion. Acknowledging the diplomatic mileage these are intended to
fulfill only adds to the case for patience.
Those of us who ardently believe that war is not only an answer but
would also be more harmful than the present, have a particular
responsibility to inform ourselves of the facts and caution patience lest
we find ourselves abetting the cause of those who want the inspection
process to be a sham.
Privatizing Public Services
A new study published in a recent issue of the Journal of the American
Medical Association asserts that for-profit dialysis centers put patients
at risk and that as many as 2500 patients throughout the United States
have died as a result. The authors of the study attribute the problem to
the fact that for-profit centers have to pay taxes and make money. To do
that they often need to cut back on staff or employ less qualified cheaper
employees.
As any study the results have their critics, mainly that the
researchers used findings from other older studies and may not have taken
into account the adoption of the National Kidney Foundation guidelines
credited with improving patient care in dialysis. Were the critics to be
right, the corollary issue of privatization would still remain. It is on
the agenda of the Bush Administration and therefore looms in other areas of
health care and of public services. Meanwhile, regardless of how or who
or where, for-profit centers engaged in the delivery of any kind of health
care services, put providers under pressure to make money.
A proposed plan to reform the troubled Los Angeles County Health department was met with criticism by Tom Scully, the Administration's
Medicare and Medi-caid Director. Apparently dismissing workable ideas, he
instead suggested that the county ought to at least partially privatize
some of its hospitals. In response an LA Times editorial put the problem of
such privatization succinctly: "What he (Scully) doesn't say is that
privatization is full of dangers because it gives healthcare providers
numerous incentives to game the system and offers few rules to prevent them
from the most egregious sorts of profiteering at patient's expense."
Given that privatization is increasingly touted as an answer to the delivery of a number of public services including the redress of health
care woes, we ought to ask whether it is a political tool or one aimed to
promote the public good?
Sexual Offenders
Do They Have Rights?
Within the prison system there is nothing lower than a child abuser. In the world at large there is no more tolerance. In several states they now
have to register with the police and their whereabouts are made public,
their address that much more available for being posted on the Internet.
Twenty-eight states have web based sex offenders information. In
addition, several states have instituted other measure to separate sex
offenders from children. In some 20 states authorities notify residents
about the past crimes of a sex offender when he or she moves into a
neighborhood. Half a dozen states subject the most dangerous offenders to
chemical castration, a series of drugs aimed to reduce sexual urges. In
some states judges have even permitted indefinite detention once the
original term of certain offenders ends. In Texas and other states who have
patterned their laws on it, sex offenders have devices that track their
movements by satellite thus alerting police should they come near a school.
There is also a so called Cyber-Sentinel program able to track those who
prey on kids through the Internet.
Now Iowa has gone a step further by prohibiting a sex offender from
living within 2000 feet of a school or child care center. It makes it
nearly impossible for those released from prison to find decent housing,
housing near transportation so that they can go to work, or just near
civilization so as to be able to start a new and healthier life.
Caution and vigilance are necessary, particularly since we do not yet
have the adequate treatment techniques to help sex offenders. But we need
to ask, when does our caution and vigilance cater to the worst of our
fears, those fears which are just a shade from hysteria?
Given the many options, Iowa has gone too far. We have the duty to
protect children, but sex offenders who have served their time have rights
which we cannot ignore.
High Tuition Costs And Creative Solutions
Education is a corollary to a democracy. Without education individuals cannot be a vital part of the society in which they participate. While the
problems of secondary education are well documented, those of the costs of
higher education are less so. We too often gloss over the problems of
universities. The budget crises in several states and the nation's weak
economy have worsened existing budget crunches, leading many institutions
to raise their tuition. Although fees were already high, they weren't high
enough to meet current costs. The reason is that fee increases are seen as
an alternative to cutting needed services or the number of classes
offered. But a hike in tuition does create a problem. In the last 20 years
(from 1981 to 2002), fee increases have more than doubled while the
median family income only rose by 25%. Critics point out that higher
tuition prices out certain students, those who may often be the most
vulnerable, or need an education the most as a means to reach a better
lifestyle. Higher fees mean some will drop out while many others will
use student loans to fill the gap, and do so at great cost to
themselves, their family and to how soon they themselves might be able to
undertake the responsibilities of a house and family.
In a Missouri small farm community, Lindenwood University whose tuition
is $11,200 a year, is keenly aware of these realities and decided to accept
as tuition the equivalent cost in any commodities that can be used in
their kitchen. Thus pigs are now tuition barter. President Dennis
Spellman is trying to expand the now three-year old program allowing up
to 50 barter students a year. Lindenwood may be the only university making
direct swaps with families but now a few small universities have banded
together to create a barter bank trading labor and goods with one another
while an administrator keeps track of "deposits" and withdrawals."
Sensitive to the problem of high tuition, many universities are
offering creative solutions. Defiance College in Ohio, for example, offers
top students who volunteer several hours a week, a cut in tuition. William
Woods University in Missouri offers lower tuition to those cheering on the
college sports teams. An increasing number of colleges freeze tuition when
a freshman enrolls thus shielding the family against possible increases.
Clark University in Massachusetts offers a free fifth year so that someone
wanting to pursue a masters can essentially do so with free tuition.
None of these measures, however, address the underlying problem that
affordable tuition is a right if our democracy is to thrive.
Web Site Of Interest: www. creativecommons.org
A New Approach To Copyrights
The Internet has changed the role and usage of copyrights. In essence
the net has made copyright infringement and pirating effortless. While many
decry this others struggle to find a balance between private ownership
and public domain. This is why creative common is interesting, it proposes
an alternative, suggesting that individuals posting their work on the net
can do so in a variety of ways such as limiting what would constitute an
infringement.
The project is based at Stanford University Law Schools Center for
Internet and Society and has an ambitious mission. "Using the copyright
system, we will make a wider, richer public domain for creators to build
upon and individuals to share."
Although the different kind of copyright licenses which can be obtained
through the sites are legal documents, there is no guarantee that they will
be honored. This enforcement problem, along with the fact that the
endeavor as a whole has a touch of preaching to the choir, may be the
weaknesses of the idea, but it is still a valiant step.
To Ponder On
"The reward for work well done is the opportunity to do
more."
Jonas Salk
|
|
