Calling all who support change and reform!

Got a couple minutes?  We need your immediate help for two things:

1. Join us at Long Beach City Hall and speak out in favor of Instant Runoff Voting (IRV).

WHAT: Instant Runoff Voting Study Session

WHERE: Long Beach City Hall, Council Chambers (1^st Floor)

333 S. Ocean Blvd., Long Beach 90802

WHEN: Tue, Oct. 6, 3:30 pm

RSVP: Gautam Dutta (info AT aaa-fund.org)

The stakes are high. Right now, we’re just one vote away from getting IRV on the ballot.

To date, Councilmembers Patrick O’Donnell (district4@longbeach.gov), Dee Andrews (district6@longbeach.gov), Rae Gabelich (district8@longbeach.gov), and Gerrie Schipske (district5@longbeach.gov) have not taken a formal position on IRV.

2. Tell Councilmember Tonia Reyes Uranga to stop blocking IRV: (562.570.6139; district7@longbeach.gov).

Last year, Ms. Uranga criticized her City Council colleagues for not putting IRV on the ballot. But last week, she nearly succeeded in killing all Council discussion of IRV.

Political incumbents should not have the final say on IRV: the voters have a right to decide.

WHY DO WE NEED IRV?

IRV will make our elections cleaner, more meaningful, and more affordable.

Currently, Long Beach, Los Angeles, and other California cities run two-round, runoff elections. Here’s the problem: Few people vote in them, and they cost millions of dollars to administer. Worse yet, runoffs often degenerate into mudslinging slugfests – turning off large numbers of voters.

With IRV, you elect a majority winner, without having to vote in a separate runoff election. All you do is rank your first three choices (1-2-3). If your first choice is eliminated, you won’t need to vote again in a separate runoff election. Instead, your vote automatically goes to your second choice (more details here).

Once we have IRV, candidates will have a strong incentive to talk more about the issues, rather than bash their opponents. Why? To win, a candidate might need to be the second choice of people who voted for someone else as their first choice. As a result, candidates will think twice before launching negative attacks.

Help us bring IRV and cleaner elections to Long Beach.

Please join us on Tuesday (after calling Ms. Uranga). Your voice will make a huge difference.

– Gautam Dutta

California, Gautam Dutta, Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), Political Reform, Voting Rights | No Comments »

Although the turnout in yesterday’s municipal elections was low, it was still a day to celebrate for voters who care about diversity and reform. Bill de Blasio and John Liu, two candidates who have voted against term limits, won their runoff elections, and should go on to win the general election in heavily Democratic New York.

Over the weekend, I went to visit the new Museum of the Chinese in the Americas (MoCA) which was designed by Maya Lin. The museum had moved into a new, larger space, airy and rich with cultural legacy and meaning. As I gazed at artifacts of Asian American history, including posters from the pre-Exclusion Act era decrying the Chinese and replicated carvings from Angel Island, fragments of immigrant hopes and dreams etched into quarantine walls, I breathed deeply. I was surrounded by the past, which shapes us but does not hold us. There was a wall listing all the major laws and court rulings that afforded Chinese Americans opportunities, and those that closed doors for entire communities. The laundry taxes. Yick Wo v. Hopkins. The Exclusion Acts – the reason why it was uncommon to see Chinese American and Asian American families in the US before the 1960s. Why it used to be much more common to be the “only lonely” at school or at work.

There was heavy history in these rooms, at times literal. The 8 pound livelihood, the weighty irons that laundry workers used to press out wrinkles – there was one that you could try to lift. Imagine how hard it would be to lift it hundreds of times a day.

Then it was on to Chinese American pioneers, the first female dentist, the first to be a pilot in the Air Force. More modern firsts like Steve Chen and Gary Locke. All this history swirling and mingling. I came out a tad overwhelmed, but grateful for the rich legacy of activism and leadership that Asian Americans before me have engaged in.

Yesterday, when I went to go vote, there was Chinese translation offered at my pollsite, and very few voters. Turnout was in the single digits. But as pundits have noted, the low turnout meant that highly motivated voters – union members, Asian Americans, can and did make their voices heard. John Liu won and by doing so, is on his way to becoming the first Asian American public official elected across New York.

For a long time, Liu had been the only voice in the NYC government that drew attention to Asian Americans and their concerns – to hate crimes, to underserved students, and to overcrowded schools. This year, he will be joined by as many as three Asian Americans in elected positions in city government.

So they might not have the same perspective or background or even agree on policies, but Liu will no longer be the only lonely elected in NYC.

– Caroline

Caroline, Democratic Party, New York | No Comments »

Ed. Note: Cameron Feng submitted this entry for our 2009 Healthcare Blogathon. Prizes include $150 in cash, free tickets to our Annual Gala, and by today, Sept. 30 9:30p PT! Like in the Oscars, You the Reader will then get to choose the winners. More details to come.

The current healthcare system in America is ridiculous. Not only is it unaffordable, it is selfish. For too long, healthcare in America has been the most expensive and lowest in quality when compared to most industrialized countries. Yet, America is leading the world in biomedical research and development. My recent experience with health insurance has given me a personal reason to advocate for healthcare reform in the United States.

Around February of this year, my father lost his job when Circuit City was forced to shut down, and along with that, he lost the health insurance for our family. This could not have happened at a worst time for me. I was and am still in the process of having my class three underbite corrected. Having gone through twenty years with an underbite, it still bothers me that I am not able to chew and enunciate properly. The first poses a medical problem that will only prove to cause problems as I age and the latter affects not only my self-confidence to not be able to articulate my thoughts, but has held me back from taking on authoritative roles past the Internal Vice President position in organizations I have been involved in. My goal to become a doctor became the final factor that convinced me to undergo surgery for the correction, and what better time to do so than right before achieving my bachelor’s degree?

I first consulted a maxillofacial surgeon in September 2008 when I still had health insurance who presented to me the steps that I would need to go through before surgery should take place. This included getting braces for $2,400 and having all four of my wisdom teeth removed, adding another $600 to my lifetime investment of a better smile, greater self-confidence, fewer jaw problems, and understandable speech. He also told me that the hospital would be able to get the insurance to cover most of the surgical costs.

Unfortunately, two months after getting my braces, my family and I lost our health insurance. Having already spent $2,400 on the braces that would only make my underbite worse, but align my teeth for surgery, I would continue my journey. Having my wisdom teeth removed in the end of July 2009 gave me another six months before the last and final step: surgery. Already without health insurance for six months, I started applying. However, I was surprised to have found my applications denied automatically. I was in utter disbelieve when the reason I was given was that my medical history showed that I had seen a maxillofacial surgeon. Because my medical history demonstrated that I was thinking about surgery, I would not be granted the peace of mind of being medically insured. Even though I needed the surgery, insurance companies would rather turn their heads and not risk having to pay for the costs. It is appalling and frightening that healthcare companies would prioritize profit over the health and quality of life of the American citizen.

– Cameron Feng

Guest Blogger, Healthcare | No Comments »

The Washington Post has a new contest up where you can submit your very own 400 word op ed on a pressing issue of the day, and compete to be a WaPo opinion journalist for a season. And hey, if you happen to write on health care, you can doubly submit it to our health care blogathon for a monetary prize. If it’s not on health care, send it to us at info@aaa-fund.com and we’ll consider publishing it regardless. You, too, can be a pundit!

Below are the rules:

Here’s your chance to put your opinions to the test — and win the opportunity to write a weekly column and a launching pad for your opinionating career!

Start making your case.
Use the entry form to send us a short opinion essay (400 words or less) pegged to a topic in the news and an additional paragraph (100 words or less) on yourself and why you should win. Entries will be judged on the basis of style, intelligence and freshness of argument, but not on whether Post editors agree or disagree with your point of view. Entry deadline: Oct. 21, 2009 at 11:59 p.m. ET.

Then get ready for the great debate.
Beginning on or about Oct. 30, ten prospective pundits will get to compete for the title of America’s Next Great Pundit, facing off in challenges that test the skills a modern pundit must possess. They’ll have to write on deadline, hold their own on video and field questions from Post readers. (Contestants won’t have to quit their day jobs, but they should be prepared to put in about eight hours a week for three weeks.) After each round, a panel of Post personalities will offer kudos and catcalls, and reader votes will help to determine who gets another chance at a byline and who has to shut down their laptop.

Eyes on the prize.
The ultimate winner will get the opportunity to write a weekly column that may appear in the print and/or online editions of The Washington Post, paid at a rate of $200 per column, for a total of 13 weeks and $2,600. Our Opinions lineup includes a dozen Pulitzer Prize winners, regulars on the national political talk shows and some of the most influential players inside the Beltway. We’ll set our promising pundit on a path to become the next byline in demand, the talking head every show wants to book, the voice that helps the country figure out what’s really going on.

So what are you waiting for?

Caroline, Media | No Comments »

In a nice twist, Sam Yoon has gotten on the Michael Flaherty bandwagon after competing with Flaherty to be the other contender in Boston’s run-off election. So now instead of Mayor Yoon, we get Deputy Mayor Yoon – if the Flaherty-Yoon ticket wins. (Boston last had a Deputy Mayor under Mayor Kevin White.)

This makes a lot of sense because although they have some policy differences, both were fighting to be the change candidate, and they fought a pretty clean campaign against each other. Actually, the idea of a unity campaign was floated before the primaries here. Flaherty gains Yoon’s policy experience and wide base of support and Sam continues to work to improve Boston. Here’s the relevant part of Sam’s email:

Starting today, I will campaign alongside Michael Flaherty as his future Deputy Mayor. This is a first step that will change Boston politics for good.

I realize that for Boston, a joint campaign, a Flaherty-Yoon “ticket,” is new and different. But we have always said that Boston politics has been too much about taking credit, and not enough about collaboration. So Michael and I will be working together to make the changes that we need in city government.

Over the next several weeks, we will be unveiling our plans for the first 100 days of our administration.

This will include enacting term limits for Mayor – putting an end to the ‘Mayor for Life’ culture in Boston that has held us back. The Boston Redevelopment Authority has been a breeding ground for back-room dealing and misuse of funds. Michael has asked that as Deputy Mayor I lead the effort to dismantle the BRA and replace it with a true community planning agency.

What do you think of term limits for mayor? Chicago and Boston have no term limits, which has led to a “mayor for life” mentality, while some might say that NYC has been forced to innovate more. Additionally, breaking up the BRA is one of the priorities that grassroots advocates have, and it makes good use of Yoon’s public policy and public planning background.

Flaherty’s email reads in part:

I am so proud to announce that we are making good on this promise—by making Sam Yoon my partner in City Hall—we are recognizing the talent and very best of our city. By standing together tomorrow, we are showing Boston that a Flaherty-Yoon administration will embrace good ideas, even if they originate from former rivals. And, in the first 100 days of our new administration, we will proudly enact term limits for the office of Mayor. We will put an end to the “Mayor for Life” culture that has held Boston back. Together, we will create a city for us.

We congratulate Sam on a hard-fought campaign and wish him success in the joint campaign. Also, kudos to Chun-Fai Chan as our AAA Fund Fellow. For video of the joint campaign kickoff, check NECN.

– Caroline

Campaign Update, Caroline, Democratic Party, Sam Yoon | No Comments »

John Liu is running in the NYC run off elections today against David Yassky. Don’t forget to hit your local pollsite and vote – this is supposed to be a very low turnout election, so your vote matters even more.

This morning, there was literally no line, so it should be a quick 3 minutes – in and out. If you aren’t sure where your local polling location is, check http://gis.nyc.gov/vote/ps/index.htm

– Caroline

Campaign Update, Caroline, Democratic Party, New York | No Comments »

AAA Fund blogger Lee Fang, who works over at Center for American Progress, has the scoop on a nutjob speaker at a major conservative conference who went through a litany of examples of how President Obama is like Adolf Hitler and urged the audience to get more guns.

If we had our guns, we would have fought a bloody battle. So, keep your guns, and buy more guns, and buy ammunition. [...] Take back America. Don’t let them take the country into Socialism. And I refer again, Hitler’s party was National Socialism. [...] And that’s what we are having here right now, which is bordering on Marxism.

Disturbingly, her Nazism speech is gaining popularity, with requests to speak in front of Tea Partiers and “a group of bankers.”

I actually saw this over on the Atlantic’s Politics page, so kudos to Lee for driving some much-needed attention to the topic.

– Caroline

Caroline | No Comments »

AAA-Fund endorses Congressional candidate Raj Goyle, a highly regarded Kansas legislator.  More details to follow.

– Gautam Dutta

AAA Fund, Congress, Democratic Party, Gautam Dutta, Grassroots Activism | No Comments »

Not doing much to improve her standing in the state capitol, AZ Governor Jan Brewer (R) went completely off message in an address last week, saying:

“It is a great relief, to say the least, to get out of that hell hole in Phoenix and be down here in Tucson.”

Brewer, who is much disliked by the legislature, was Lt. Governor before ascending to the top state job after highly popular former Gov. Janet Napolitano (D) joined the administration as Secretary of Homeland Security. She also presided over a disastrous budget session this year, and given her approval ratings, will have a tough time being welcomed back as an elected governor.

– Caroline

Caroline, Republicans | No Comments »

AAA-Fund endorses Iraq war vet Dr. Manan Trivedi for Congress.  More details to follow.

– Gautam Dutta

AAA Fund, Campaign Update, Congress, Democratic Party, Gautam Dutta, Grassroots Activism | No Comments »

Bel Leong-Hong is a Board Member and the Chair-Elect of the AAA Fund. She is also Member At-Large of the Democratic National Committee and was re-elected Chair of the DNC’s Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Caucus.

Dear Friends,

I am writing to ask for your help. Shekar and I are doing it again for Senator Creigh Deeds. But this time the event is in Maryland, hosted by our own Governor O’Malley. As always, we need your help not just for what you personally can do but also by circulating this flyer to friends and acquaintances.

This is a very important race for Democrats in our region—not only because this is the first election since we poured our efforts into electing Barack Obama, but because the nation will be looking at this race as a bellwether for 2010 midterm election. We must send a positive message that the change we all worked so hard to achieve is here to stay!!! This is important, that is why many of us Marylanders are joining hands with our brothers and sisters in Virginia, led by our own Governor O’Malley and party chair, Susie Turnbull , to put on this event.

Senator Deeds is now in a close race- he has closed the gap in the polls, so that it is statistically an even match… but a lot more has to be done between now and election day. Our help right now really means a lot—especially since TV advertising alone costs a ton in the DC market, and Northern Virginia is critical. Creigh Deeds has made clear commitments to diversity and to having an open door to our concerns. Plus he is a decent, honorable man. Let’s help people like this win over those who would take us back to divisiveness and gridlock!

So, please circulate the flyer and do come on October 8th.

Thanks for all your help. YOU MAKE IT HAPPEN!

- Bel Leong-Hong and Shekar Narasimhan

____________________________________________________

Governor Martin O’Malley

MD Democratic Party Chair

Susan W. Turnbull

and

Shekar Narasimhan and Bel Leong Hong

INVITE YOU TO A RECEPTION TO BENEFIT

Creigh Deeds

The 2009 VIRGINIA Democratic Gubernatorial Candidate

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

October 8, 2009 • 5:30 pm

At the Home of

Barbara Goldberg Goldman & Michael F. Goldman

10030 Carmelita drive

Potomac, MD

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

To RSVP please contact

Melissa Smith 410-269-8818 – msmith@mddems.org

OR Adam GOERS 202-812-3231 agoers@martinomalley.com

Co-host – $5,000     SPONSOR – $2,500

Benefactor – $1,000     individual – $500

__Yes, I/we would like to attend the Reception at $  _______.

__ No, I/we are not able to attend, please accept a contribution of $_______.

Please make your personal check payable to “Deeds for Virginia” and send back in the enclosed envelope or mail to:

Deeds for Virginia

P.O. Box 11658

Alexandria, VA 22312

Please charge my personal contribution of $____________ to my:    __Visa  __ MC __AMEX   __Discover

Credit Card Number

Exp. Date

Cardholder’s Name
(as it appears on the card)

Cardholder’s Signature ________________________

Name:

Address:

City:                                  State:                            Zip:

Employer*:                                                                                 City of Business*:

Occupation*:

Home Phone:                                          Office Phone:

Fax Phone:                                             Email:

*Information legally required by the Virginia State Board of Elections.

Contributions or gifts to Deeds for Virginia are not tax deductible.

Campaign Update, Democratic Party, The Editors, Virginia | No Comments »

William Safire, a formidable conservative wordsmith, has died of cancer at age 79.

While I have often disagreed with his views, I have always admired his lifelong devotion to the written word.  Indeed, generations of writers (and bloggers) grew up with his weekly NY Times column (“On Language”) (via NY Times):

There may be many sides in a genteel debate, but in the Safire world of politics and journalism it was simpler: there was his own unambiguous wit and wisdom on one hand and, on the other, the blubber of fools he called “nattering nabobs of negativism” and “hopeless, hysterical hypochondriacs of history.”

He was a college dropout and proud of it, a public relations go-getter who set up the famous Nixon-Khrushchev “kitchen debate” in Moscow, and a White House wordsmith in the tumultuous era of war in Vietnam, Nixon’s visit to China and the gathering storm of the Watergate scandal, which drove the president from office.

Then, from 1973 to 2005, Mr. Safire wrote his twice weekly “Essay” for the Op-Ed Page of The Times, a forceful conservative voice in the liberal chorus. Unlike most Washington columnists who offer judgments with Olympian detachment, Mr. Safire was a pugnacious contrarian who did much of his own reporting, called people liars in print and laced his opinions with outrageous wordplay.

Critics initially dismissed him as an apologist for the disgraced Nixon coterie. But he won the 1978 Pulitzer Prize for commentary, and for 32 years tenaciously attacked and defended foreign and domestic policies, and the foibles, of seven administrations. Along the way, he incurred enmity and admiration, and made a lot of powerful people squirm.

Mr. Safire also wrote four novels, including “Full Disclosure” (Doubleday, 1977), a best-seller about succession issues after a president is blinded in an assassination attempt, and nonfiction that included “The New Language of Politics” (Random House, 1968), and “Before the Fall” (Doubleday, 1975), a memoir of his White House years.

And from 1979 until earlier this month, he wrote “On Language,” a New York Times Magazine column that explored written and oral trends, plumbed the origins and meanings of words and phrases, and drew a devoted following, including a stable of correspondents he called his Lexicographic Irregulars.

The columns, many collected in books, made him an unofficial arbiter of usage and one of the most widely read writers on language. It also tapped into the lighter side of the dour-looking Mr. Safire: a Pickwickian quibbler who gleefully pounced on gaffes, inexactitudes, neologisms, misnomers, solecisms and perversely peccant puns, like populism and momulism.

There were columns on blogosphere blargon, tarnation-heck euphemisms, dastardly subjunctives and even Barack and Michelle Obama’s fist bumps. And there were Safire “rules for writers”: Remember to never split an infinitive. Take the bull by the hand and avoid mixing metaphors. Proofread carefully to see if you words out. Avoid clichés like the plague. And don’t overuse exclamation marks!!

Behind the fun, readers said, was a talented linguist who could not resist his addiction to alliterative allusions. There was a consensus too that his Op-Ed essays, mostly written in Washington and syndicated in hundreds of newspapers, were the work of a sophisticated analyst with voluminous contacts and insights into the way things worked in Washington.

We salute a leader who loved language.

– Gautam Dutta

Gautam Dutta | No Comments »

The Press-Telegram just published a Letter to the Editor written by your humble correspondent:

Thanks to a bizarre City Council debate, instant runoff voting (IRV) has come to the fore in Long Beach.

Instant runoff elections

Re “Confusion, frustration, reign at City Council voting system meeting” (Page 1, Sept. 23):

Thanks to a bizarre City Council debate, instant runoff voting (IRV) has come to the fore in Long Beach.

Currently, Long Beach runs costly, two-round elections for its city and school elections. While taxpayers are stuck with a tab of up to $1.7 million per election, few people actually vote — in part because of voter fatigue. By year’s end, Long Beach will have had nine elections in just two years.

By allowing voters to rank their choices (1-2-3), IRV not only elects a majority winner, but eliminates costly runoff elections. This way, if your first choice is eliminated, you do not need to vote again in a separate runoff election. Instead, your vote automatically goes to your second choice.

IRV has been successfully used in San Francisco for five straight elections, and has also been adopted by Oakland, Berkeley, Santa Fe, Memphis and Minneapolis.

Some critics, such as Long Beach Councilmember Tonia Reyes Uranga, claim that many voters will not understand IRV. However, after San Francisco adopted IRV, its voter-error rate did not go up. And in a recent poll, San Francisco voters preferred IRV to the previous runoff system by a margin of 3 to 1.

Simply put, voters understand and prefer IRV. We urge the City Council to promptly put IRV on the April 2010 ballot. The voters have a right to decide whether IRV is right for Long Beach.

– Gautam Dutta

California, Gautam Dutta, Grassroots Activism, Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), Political Reform, Voting Rights | No Comments »

Here’s a novel way to beat unemployment (via Irish Times):

AN UNEMPLOYED man using a metal detector in a recently ploughed field in England has found the greatest-ever trove of Anglo-Saxon treasure, including 1,000 pieces of finely crafted gold and silver which have left experts in tears at their sight.

The discovery was made in south Staffordshire in July by 55-year-old Terry Herbert, but remained secret until yesterday when it was declared as treasure belonging to the Crown.

The find will make millionaires of Mr Herbert and the farmer who owns the land, although the British Museum yesterday conceded that it will be difficult to put a value on the hoard, already dubbed “The Staffordshire Hoard”. The farmer, a friend of Mr Herbert who had given him permission to trawl his lands, is not to be identified in a bid to stop his lands being overwhelmed by treasure-hunters, the authorities have decided.

The 7th-century treasures from the ancient kingdom of Mercia are believed to be booty which was stripped from the corpses of royal and aristocratic warriors and then, for reasons unknown, buried in land near Lichfield and forgotten.

Kevin Leahy, a medievalist who examines properly disclosed finds made by treasure-hunters, said experts had been in awe: “We were in awe of this material – the responsibility of bringing something like this home was overwhelming.” The haul includes jewellery made in Babylon – far away from Dark Ages Britain – pommel caps, helmets, bracelets with Biblical inscriptions, and swords hilts.

The taking of the sword hilts is described in Beowulf, the epic Anglo-Saxon poem translated by poet Seamus Heaney. “I think it is the equivalent of head-hunting. I don’t think they were taken off people who were still alive,” said Dr Leahy.

Time to get out our metal detectors.

– Gautam Dutta

Gautam Dutta | No Comments »

Ed. Note: Katherine Yau submitted this entry for our 2009 Healthcare Blogathon. Prizes include $150 in cash, free tickets to our Annual Gala, and by Sept. 30 9:30p PT! Like in the Oscars, You the Reader will then get to choose the winners. More details to come.

In regards to the controversy nursing the issue of national health care, we need to reconsider what we perceive “quality” and “affordable” to mean. With a political body made up of irreconcilable bipartisan agenda, and progress becoming synonymous with stunt antics, (Will the real Senator Wilson, please sit down?) compromise will be not only decidedly difficult, but deeply disappointing to both sides of the health war.

The argument abridged: Health insurance companies make major boot lickin’ bank from the systematic denial of medical fee coverage to sick, and “potentially sick” people. As a result, 47 million people are denied the aid of a single federal dime to help them pay off a prescription for Singular to ease them from suffocating from a raging case of asthma, (a month’s supply of which runs up to about $116.) Not a dollar to go to the $3,000 it takes to X-ray and slap a cast around their kid’s broken arm, or a cent for the woman with a malignant tumor in her breast, where chemotherapy alone will set her back $20,000 at minimum.

Camp Elephante wants to Keep Things the Way They Are. “Go Capitalism! Go USA!” is the general groaning mantra. Sometimes someone grips a picture of Obama sporting a Hitler moustache. (“Socialism, bahumbug.”) Here’s the thing: where American health care is concerned, Capitalism operates on capitalizing off the poor, the weak and the dying.

Yet while most of the country finds it easy to lean left and spit on their conservative neighbors, (a position I find all too cozy-comfortable) we need to realize both sides have their points. With a “public option”, which will give everyone an equal opportunity for healthcare, it will also inevitably buy out private insurance companies. This means while everyone gets the same treatment, there is a wealth distribution which will make certain medications and procedures unavailable to anybody. To what extent will this barrier reach? Under the umbrella of the public option, would Singular or chemotherapy be available to anyone?

To me, the responsibility of our representatives is to negotiate a medium between broad and small government: the ongoing argument of US politics since the days of Jefferson and Madison. To not sacrifice quality with affordability.

My story is not as dire as the deplorable situations many have found themselves in as a result of the glaring holes in this country’s health care system. As a college student in California, while being unable to register as a full time student due to the recent bloody budget cuts on public education systems statewide, I was also in danger of being ineligible for health insurance. Which is really, really bad because, well, I’m on a lot of medication. So on a personal note, while I am for universal health care, I am admittedly wary of what kind of changes will be made to my own medicinal regimen. (And let’s just say, it’s probably in the best interest of the public at large, if I keep to that regimen.)

– Katherine Yau

Guest Blogger, Healthcare | No Comments »