http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-december-16-2010/9-11-first-responders-react-to-the-senate-filibuster
As you probably know, it's been almost a decade since 9/11, and the NYC first responders are still fighting to get health care compensation for the multitude of illnesses likely caused or exacerbated by the toxic dust when the towers fell. This predicament was also described in Michael Moore's "Sicko". Obama and the Congressional Dems are working on a bill that would provide no-cost care to them for 10 years, but of course the GOP senators are blocking it to prevent a moral victory for their rivals during this unusually productive lame duck session. Many of the responders have private insurance, but the copays for respiratory diseases and cancers are of course still significant. And worker's comp won't cover them because they can't medically prove that their conditions were 100% caused by work activities. But forget these technicalities and excuses. Yes it's expensive to care for them, but what message are we sending if we turn our backs on the first responders, people who risked everything to help their fellow man during a disaster that was not of their doing? And it's even worse when our gov't is to blame for partially creating/training Al Qaeda, failing to prevent the attack, and now ignoring the health needs of the people who were sent in to clean up their mess. Heck they weren't even sent, they went in willingly because that's who they are.
Helping the responders wouldn't be unprecedented, and it seems like a no-brainer to the rest of us. Dialysis is so expensive and life-extending that the Nixon admin. approved Medicaid to cover any American who needs it (this was America's first experiment with socialized medicine). US servicepeople who were exposed to Agent Orange in Vietnam are covered for various diseases related to the toxin (unfortunately the Vietnamese, many of whom fought on our side and were exposed in much greater number/magnitude, are not included). So why not cover the 9/11 heroes? The GOP defends its filibuster by saying that they don't have the time to handle the issue now, and it would be "disrespectful" to their families, the institution of Congress, and the Christmas tradition if they kept working this week. I think Mrs. McCain and McConnell will survive if hubby is out of town for a few more days. And what better way to celebrate the birth of the Prince of Peace than to show compassion to hundreds of Good Samaritans in need? As you can see, it's just BS. The GOP threatened to shut down Congress unless the Bush tax cuts were extended, but they won't sacrifice an hour of their holiday vacation for people who showed us the best of what America is, and paid the price. Of course Jon Stewart was the only media source to cover this issue.
http://www.npr.org/2010/12/20/132145959/pentagon-health-plan-wont-cover-brain-damage-therapy-for-troops
Another problem is the VA's Tricare insurance coverage for "cognitive rehabilitation" for war veterans with the common condition of TBI (often the result of insurgent IED and mortar attacks). Depending on how you diagnose, 5 to 60 thousand soldiers and vets may have TBI. CR therapy is quite expensive ($50k per patient), but it has been scientifically shown to improve functionality and quality of life in the civilian sector (car accident victims, stroke, etc.). In some cases, patients were unable to even read or speak full sentences before therapy, but regained those critical skills after. It is a personalized, holistic, unorthodox treatment, so of course some in the medical and health care policy communities are skeptical, and it doesn't really fit the VA bureaucracy classifications. But when 5 of the 12 major private insurers cover CR, there is likely some medical benefit. When Obama was a senator (and presidential hopeful) in 2008, he and 69 other Congressmen wrote to Tricare urging them to cover CR: "Given the prevalence of TBI among returning service personnel, it is difficult to comprehend why the military's managed health care plan does not cover the very therapies that give our soldiers the best opportunities to recover and live full and productive lives." Now a spokesman for Obama said that the president has "no comment" on the issue, and his Defense Sec. Gates is also not explicitly supportive, since they are leading an effort to cut Pentagon costs to get the deficit hawks off their backs (vet health care is a major gov't expenditure as my tax email showed). So Tricare is playing all sorts of games, saying the data is inconclusive, or they should wait until the therapy is proven so they know they're not doing more harm than good.
We criticize the Muslim militants for brainwashing youth to become suicide bombers, or the Soviet Union for sending in soldiers to clean up Chernobyl protected only by a 50 cents dust mask, but considering these failures, are we doing much better? If we keep ignoring and abusing patriots after they sacrifice everything for what the gov't tells them is their duty, America will eventually run out of patriots (or turn off future patriots) and we'll be a much weaker nation as a result. The gov't can't take their loyalty for granted, and we waste such precious resources at our own peril. Maybe we should consider all these costs the next time we engage in military adventurism. With all this talk about gov't living within our means, then we shouldn't fight a war we can't afford, especially when our survival and our allies are not in immediate peril. And is money really the issue if maintenance costs for our bloated nuclear arsenal (in the tens of billions, and the GOP refuses to reduce it to START Treaty recommendations, fighting Obama on yet another irrational front) would easily pay for cognitive rehab and 9/11 responder care for life?
