It's Crazy Out There!

To whom it may concern,

Two quick questions:
Why drop something from the health care reform bills (i.e. end of life counseling) if the myths surrounding it have already be debunked? Bending to false claims will only bolster this obstructive politics and in the end, produce a lower quality health care reform bill.

Secondly, where did the finance overhaul go? I know we have to focus on health care, and your administration made that choice, but I believe that we have missed a huge opportunity to structurally change the way our economy works. Not just by investing in green technologies, or shifting markets, but how we invest, save, and spend our money. The growth model that this country has been booming on for the past 50 years is unsustainable and at the core of a lot of these environmental and financial problems. We should have ended the Federal Reserve System in the wake of this scandal, and instead you promoted the people who were behind the collapse. The question I want answered is who controls the Federal Reserve? I know that it was originally formed with private money, and the United States government is only partly in control. Why then can no one answer me this question and why would we continue to let private businesses control our monetary policy?

I voted and campaigned for this administration, and this is my biggest disappointment to date.
Thank you for your time,

GUNNAR HAND, AICP

Health Car Reform

To whom it may concern,

I believe that the most pressing issue that needs to be addressed in this debate is the cost of inactivity. It is briefly mentioned, but I think that if people knew what it meant not to act, they would agree more with the reforms or at least seek to better understand and provide input rather than just yell and scream. I also think that more needs to be done and/or explained for those with existing health insurance. The only benefit that I seemed to hear is that by insuring all Americans, there would be a greater discount over time due to competition, and that the hidden cost of $1,000 to cover the uninsured would eventually be eliminated. Can we not guarantee that once this bill is passed that it will definitively be eliminated? Or can we require insurance companies to remove this hidden cost immediately? I have quality health care coverage, and I want to know more about what this bill means for me. Additionally, and I know the President does not like to look backwards, but can we at least talk a little about how everything that the detractors are saying now about federal healthcare reform, is what they were previously promoting and supporting under the Bush administration’s expansion of Medicare and Medicaid? This health care reform expanded costly federal subsidies, prevented access to cheaper drugs, and further bankrupted this country to the point where we are now. I would like a more historical perspective on the issue in general. One last thing: at these town hall meetings, I suggest that the Senators and Representatives first ask who among them uses or benefits from some sort of government health care program. When all the hecklers raise their hands, it should be very telling. Thank you for your time,

GUNNAR HAND, AICP

Another Note from President Obama

To whom it may concern,

Here is the second response from the Obama Administration:

Dear Friend: Thank you for writing to me. I appreciate hearing from you and value your input. Each day, I am moved by the messages I have received from people across the country. Far too many Americans are struggling--falling behind on mortgage payments, coping with illness, or losing a job without warning. My Administration is working to address the serious challenges our Nation faces. I am committed to taking immediate steps that generate job creation and economic recovery, and I am determined to make investments that lay a new foundation for real and lasting progress.

To build this new foundation, we need health care reform--this year--that reduces costs, protects health care choices, and assures quality, affordable care for all Americans. I encourage you to visit www.HealthReform.gov to learn more about my commitment to enacting comprehensive health care reform in 2009.

I am also dedicated to building a clean energy economy that creates millions of jobs, helps us achieve energy independence, and reduces pollution as we tackle the effects of global warming. Please visit www.Recovery.gov to read about the more than $60 billion in clean energy investments my Administration has made to jump-start our economy and build the jobs of tomorrow.

To prepare our children to thrive in the global economy, we must guarantee every child a complete and competitive education. For information about my education reform agenda, please join me online at: www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/education.

At the same time, we have an obligation to rein in our budget deficit by cutting wasteful spending and ineffective programs. We can do all this, and change the way business is done in Washington, by building the most open, transparent, and accountable government in our history.

While we repair our communities, we must also recognize the important contributions of our service men and women in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other nations. Our military and their families have borne an enormous burden for their fellow citizens, serving with honor and succeeding beyond any expectation. For those who have been injured or lost their lives in pursuit of our freedom, we owe them our undying gratitude. I am committed to assisting our servicemembers, veterans, and their families and honoring our debts to them.

The only way to solve the problems of our time is to involve all Americans in shaping the policies that affect our lives. I hope you continue to explore www.WhiteHouse.gov, which is regularly updated and more interactive than ever before. Thank you again for writing. Sincerely, Barack Obama To be a part of our agenda for change, join us at www.WhiteHouse.gov

GUNNAR HAND, AICP

How Did This Environmental Disaster Happen?

To whom it may concern,

Can someone please explain to me how Coeur d'Alene Mines Corp appealed their plan to dump mine tailings into a lake on federal land in Alaska all the way to the Supreme Court and win? Seriously, how can this possibly comply with the Clean Water Act? Now that another inane and asinine policy of the Bush era has doomed a lake in Alaska, can we please overturn this policy that allows the US Army Corps of Engineers to make such rulings? With 1.5 million ounces of proven gold deposits, I think that the mining company can afford to dump the waste elsewhere.

GUNNAR HAND, AICP

Where is the Federal Land Use Policy?

To whom it may concern,

Land use policy and control is an inherently localized manner. But the federal government has had an increasing impact on local decision through court cases, tax structures, and transportation projects. Land use and transportation are inextricable interconnected, and the Federal Highway Reauthorization Acts always impact the way cities across the country continue to develop. While local leadership in many parts of the country has successfully guided these funds into mass transportation and alternatives to the automobile, the vast majority of the funds go to the expansion of our highways. And it is these subsidized highways more than any other factors that induce sprawl in America. Sprawl that devastates our farmland, our environment, our social network, and out economic efficiency. We should shift subsidies from single family homes to transit oriented development. Or even reward those who live without a car. If this administration wants to seriously alter the economy and our carbon footprint, then they will have to change the way that this country develops. We must focus on mass transportation, infill development and the revitalization of our existing infrastructure. You see these connections being made in places like California where greenhouse gas emissions laws are starting to encourage more compact, walkable neighborhoods and open space preservation. How will the federal government support and influence the private sector to shift into this new focus on the city?

GUNNAR HAND, AICP

Israeli Settlements

To whom it may concern,

The Israeli-Palestinian Road Map to peace is a very complicated process that requires both peoples to embark on simultaneous courses of action. From the very beginning, this Road Map has been riddled by false starts, false promises, and political upheaval. The process is inherently flawed in that it requires a diplomatic quid pro quo between two groups that have never worked hand in hand. And diplomacy never works when forced. Unfortunately, this universally accepted approach is very susceptible to failure because it removes the opportunity for compromise by setting a rigid path to peace. Unless you lose a war, peace is very much an on-going process. In that sense, the Road Map only leads to frustration, resentment, and mistrust when neither side is willing to make the first step. Recently, the lynchpin of this process has been Israeli settlements in the West Bank. The Road Map calls for these settlements to be halted and removed in order for the peace process to move forward. But this is wholly unnecessary. If Jewish settlers choose to move into the West Bank, then they should be allowed that choice, within land use law and environmental constraints. When that land then becomes Palestine, they will have a new choice; to become exiles in their own “land” or to join the Palestinian government. These enclaves should be viewed as less of a roadblock to peace and more of an opportunity for social integration. Once incorporated, these Jewish settlers would be forced to work with and hopefully in their new government. In the end, both States must recognize that they will not and should not be all Jewish or all Muslim, but as the cradle of the three faiths of Abraham, they will be multi-cultural and multi-ethnic. Why are we now beholden to this Road Map, and will you forge a new peace process?

GUNNAR HAND, AICP

Constraining State Ballot Initiatives

To whom it may concern,

Across the nation the State Ballot Initiative has been a growing force in local, regional, and state politics. Traditionally, these ballot initiatives have been used to advance issues that are not always popular with politicians. Political “third rail” issues like medical marijuana or gay marriage end up on state ballot initiatives through a relatively easy process. Through a ballot initiative, minority voices with powerful allies and large purses can bring an issue before the public. In some instances, this is the most direct form of democracy where the populace is essentially self-legislating. However, as is the case in California, these ballot initiatives have become ubiquitous. Of particular concern are ballot initiatives that mandate certain spending levels or have a permanent effect on the tax structure, budget, and policy. A democracy is supposed to change with the times and with its people. It is meant to be flexible. To have a ballot initiative passed 30 years ago tie the hands of the legislature today is counterproductive. State Ballot Initiatives do have their place. They should be used locally and regionally to generate funds for specific projects like mass transportation or cultural institutions. For States, they should be used to direct the legislature to address an issue instead of usurping the legislature. How can the federal government work to limit ballot initiatives that have disastrous effects on the long-term solvency of States?

GUNNAR HAND, AICP