Now freshman Congressman Rick Berg labeled his campaign with a phrase that annoyed me then and now. He urged citizens to vote in favor of North Dakota Values. It is really difficult to know just what that means or how the values of one state would be different from the values of another. I think it is one of those phrases intended to generate a sense of we vs. them – as in we are special and they are not. We have good values and they don’t.
The video accompanying the ads tended to portray the opponent, democrat Earl Pomeroy, as having lost his North Dakota values. While Pomeroy has obviously done tremendous things for the state of North Dakota, he supposedly had fallen in with the politicians in Washington and lost touch with his North Dakota roots.
I have opinions about many political issues. I am what most would consider a liberal democrat. I understand what I am. There is one particular issue and one component of this issue that will get me upset enough to spent my time doing things like writing this post or contacting the politicians who represent me. I support a better approach to health care. I have particular concerns about the number of individuals with no health care and a personal concern with the way the health care industry treats those with pre-existing conditions. My wife has suffered through two bouts with breast cancer and has the genetic condition that is evaluated using bracanalysis. This is what might be called a pre-existing condition.When you propose it is fine for the health care industry to ignore pre-existing conditions I react to your position in a personal way. Succinctly, I think you are selfish and lucky enough not to have had to deal with some of the realities of life.
So, when Representative Berg voted to repeal the existing health care plan, I sent him an email explaining my wife’s situation and expressing my concern that he was not willing to address the problem of pre-existing conditions. BTW – my wife has health coverage, but this is because she cannot be denied as part of my plan. On her own, or when seeking coverage unique to her (e.g., long-term care insurance) she is out of what some would describe as LUCK. Representative Berg evidently is concerned that there is come relationship between the present health care approach and jobs which he explained on the house floor. I am not exactly sure I understand the connection between ignoring the uninsured, the problem of those who cannot acquire insurance, and jobs, but you are free to listen to his comments yourself.
I did not really expect him to reply directly to my concern – what would he say? I did expect one of his minions would send a response probably indicating that while the representative was sensitive to problems of those unable to purchase coverage, health care is a complex issue and he has to make decisions on what is best for the country. I could have generated the same blather, but I have yet to receive a response so I am not certain what his position is.
Back to the issue of North Dakota values.
What am I to think at this point? I noticed that Berg voted with the rest of Republicans on this issue. This looks pretty much like politics as usual to me. Politics is politics no matter how long you have been in Washington. Anyone surprised?
So, just what is the North Dakota position on health care. What values is Representative Berg now promoting? Really hard to say, but it looks from here like the Representative assumes North Dakotans support some kind of “I got mine, too bad for you” value system. We certainly are special.