Why I'd Really like to Vote for Barack Obama - But I'm Not so Certain That I Can

Barack Obama is, hands down, the most exciting Presidential contender since John F. Kennedy in my view. The fact that he's Hawaiian-born, the son of an African father and white American mother, Harvard-educated, and appears to speak with the words of the angels makes him a winner in my book. The recent Democratic National Convention was a huge love-in for the young man who would be our next leader: star-studded, but not celebrity obsessed; carefully calculated in its script, yet coming together refreshingly casual. Most of America, it seems, has forgotten the fact that he "was a member of an anti-white, anti-American church for twenty years", as quoted from a letter to the editor of the Burlington County (New Jersey) Times on September 4, 2008. Obama has risen like a phoenix from the ashes of that situation, coming off as a man of character who chose to go his separate way from that church.

He is an outstanding man, professionally and personally. Why, then, am I having such a hard time committing my vote for him come the November election?

The selection of Joe Biden as his choice of running mate was a stroke of sheer genius. There's nothing quite like the coupling of the young, charismatic Obama with the white father-figure Biden, who was apparently born in the foyer of the Congress and never left. Each complements the other perfectly; each brings to the table what the other may lack. On the other hand, McCain's selection of Sarah (Susan? Sharon?) Palin as our possible next Vice President, a heartbeat away from leading the nation, was appalling. Mrs. Pallin appears to have difficulty leading her own family, let alone our nation. The choice to vote for Obama seems like such a simple no-brainer...

And yet, I have lingering doubts. Perhaps one of the most troubling is his health care platform. As a woman who was permanently disabled in a boating accident nearly a decade ago, I have no kind words for the American medica, health insurance and pharmaceutical industries. If Canada can manage a universal health care system, why can't we? Are the Swedes that much more advanced than we that they, too, can make this work but we still have trouble figuring it out?

The real culprit in an American universal health care system, to my way of thinking and limited experience, is the presence of drug manufacturers and health insurance companies. It never ceases to amaze me when, on nearly every visit to any number of doctors or specialists, there's always at least one drug company representative poised, ready to pounce, in the waiting room. I've heard them commiserating with the doctor's office staff over the fact that the government will no longer allow them to dispense pens and note paper come January, 2009. (Pens! Notepaper! Give me a break. If it weren't for reforms in legislation regarding pharmaceuticals, doctors and their entire office staffs would still be chowing down on free lunches before heading out to use their 'complimentary' opera/baseball game/car wash/basketball finals tickets.) The drug companies need serious regulation. They should not be allowed to dispense free samples to physicians in the hopes that doctors will then recommend and prescribe their brands over that of their competitors - often at the expense of the patient's well being and overall health. The only 'healthy' one in this scenario is the fat and ever-growing balance sheet of the major drug manufacturers. Instead of dispensing with all of these hundreds of thousands of free drug samples, why don't the drug companies give them to the people who need them the most - the American consumer? Charge 15% over your manufacturing costs and cut out the millions of dollars in your marketing budgets, boys. it's time to do the right thing.

Although I did digress, health care is a huge problem. It may be more impractical to achieve than withdrawing from the Iraqi war. While disentangling ourselves from Iraq is a question of subtraction, providing equal and affordable health care for all Americans, regardless of circumstances, will cost a fortune. It will take time. I honestly don't think that you can undo what's become the culture of this country towards health care during the term of one president. There's too much money to be had for the medical, insurance and drug companies to just roll over on this one. I doubt that I'll see universal health care in this country during my lifetime.

I also have the gut feeling that somehow, somewhere, lurking in the wings is Hillary Clinton, who will be the Health Czar when/if Obama is elected. I'm guessing that there was a price to be paid for her playing nicely at the Convention. Granted, HRC will have the mantle of an elected official to back her up if she does take on this cause, unlike her last attempts at reform. Does she have the capability to pull it off, or even get it moving?

The bottom line, as it usually is, is all about the money. Universal health care is going to cost a lot of money, and the last time I'd checked, the Federal government hadn't yet set up a savings account to pay for it. Getting the economy back on track is going to cost money. The bail out of the Mac's has to be born by someone, and that someone is you and me, the American tax payer. Economic stimulus checks went to put a pot roast on the table and to pay the electric bill, not to make that special purchase at Tiffany's. It will cost money to jump start a rapidly declining economy, to pull us out of the recession that we are now truly in. Where will we find the money to do these things - all of them noble, righteous, popular and seriously necessary. How much more can be taken out of our pockets?

I worry that a Democratic president, in a quest to do 'the right thing', will tax us all into oblivion - if we're not halfway there already.