Conflicting Views: The Cost of Not Having Health Insurance

Matt Yglesias, Tyler Cowen, and Andrew Sullivan were all blogging about the same thing this week: how many people actually die from not having health insurance.

All of their analyses start with an article by Megan McArdle. The article basically asserts that there isn't evidence to prove that a significant number of people without health insurance die from lack of insurance. This assertion conflicts with a 2008 report from Urban Institute that estimated that 20,000 people die from lack of health insurance every year. The problem with the Urban Institute study, according to McArdle, is that it is an observational study instead of an experimental study, which would be much more expensive and labor intensive. Also, the 2008 study did not take into account many confounding variables, such as the fact that those without health insurance are more likely to be poor, smokers, less educated, obese, etc. McArdle has a whole list of why the previous statistics claiming that lack of health insurance causes more deaths is biased (anyone is Statistics will find numerous examples of things we've studied).

She then discusses a study done using more than 600,000 subjects. The study, which measured and controlled many factors, concluded that there was no significantly elevated risk among the uninsured. McArdle also throws in assertion that lack of health care is not necessarily responsible for more deaths than health care itself, citing an estimate that around 80,000 people die from infections that result from medical treatment. At the end of the article, McArdle talks about how leaving tens of millions of Americans without health insurance violates our sense of equity, which correlates strongly to this weekend's worksheet that has us both analyze the importance of equity and grade the execution of equity in America's economic system in comparison to other trade offs.

As far as other opinions go:

Matt Yglesias, in this post, cites conflicting evidence and claims that there is not evidence to overturn the "principle that has strong theoretical support."

Tyler Cowen, in Marginal Revolution (scroll down until you reach "Clarification on heath care" and "How many people die from lack of health insurance" is more indecisive. He believes McArdle to have compelling arguments and evidence, but intuitively believes that lack of health care should make a difference. His logic is that if it is this difficult to reach the conclusion that people die from lack of health care, then any deaths from lack of health care do not occur in a large enough number to be significant.

I have to admit that McArdle's article made many compelling arguments as far as the bias in the previous statistical students. By the end of the article, I was practically convinced. I thought her analysis of the effects of the confounding variables was very logical. The assertion that going on Medicare at 65 doesn't reduce the risk of death, and that there is no discontinuity in the mortality rate, was also a logical and convincing argument countering the belief that having health insurance reduces death.

Yet, I also find myself skeptical that lack of insurance really makes no difference in health. Reading Austin Frakt's post refuting McArdle's article reinforced the seemingly more logical conclusion that having health insurance must somehow impact mortality.

Basically, just like most of these posters, I can't come to a definitive conclusion with all of the conflicting evidence presented. I imagine that this cyber-exchange between these bloggers will continue over the next few days and I will definitely be reading to see if anyone presents any utterly convincing arguments.

Thoughts? Comments? Does health insurance reduce death rates? Is McArdle way off, or is Yglesias in denial?

More reading:

Megan McArdle's response to Yglesias and Frakt: here

McArdle's blog posts on the subject: here and here

Lieutenant Governor Confirmed?

After California's previous Lieutenant Governor, essentially the "vice president" of the state, John Garamendi was elected to the United States House of Representatives last November, Governor Schwarzenegger picked state Senator Abel Maldonado to be the new Lieutenant Governor. However, Maldonado can only take office after he is confirmed by the state Assembly and the state Senate. While the Senate approved the nomination, the Assembly voted 37-35, just 4 votes shy of the simple majority needed to confirm Maldonado's nomination.

However, the Governor's office then released a statement saying that they believe that 41 people would have to vote against Maldonado's nomination to prevent him from taking office. The Assembly's speaker, however, issued a statement saying that Maldonado cannot take office because he needs 40 votes to be confirmed. The Governor's office still insists that Senator Maldonado will be sworn in as Lieutenant Governor and is planning a confirmation ceremony.

Many people insist that choosing Maldonado is a political move intended to position him as an incumbent in the coming November election when the voters will choose the Lieutenant Governor.

As Assemblyman Jim Nielsen said, "So much for bipartisanship. Today it died in the state Assembly." Is it just me, or is it kind of ridiculous that the state Constitution doesn't make it perfectly clear how many votes are needed for a confirmation? Is Schwarzenegger abusing this lack of clarity to get what he wants? Does he truly believe that Maldonado was lawfully confirmed? Are legislatures allowing their votes to be decided be politics and upcoming elections, rather than actual policy/competency issues?

Note: Link to article in title ...

Senate Confirms 27 Presidential Nominees

The Senate has now confirmed 27 of President Obama's nominees (see previous post about holds). Link to NYTimes article in title.

The White House issued a statement by the President in which he reiterated the need for changes in how Washington works. Acknowledging the holds on the nominations by various senators, the statement read, "many holds were motivated by a desire to leverage projects for a Senator’s state or simply to frustrate progress. It is precisely these kinds of tactics that enrage the American people." I'm not sure the holds enraged the American people so much as drew attention to the ridiculousness of the motivation for the holds, but it's good to see the President following up on what he said in the State of the Union speech.

The statement also demonstrates the power of the President over the Senate; he can make or threaten to make recess appointments, thus bypassing the Senate in the nomination/confirmation process. Regarding the remaining waiting nominees, President Obama said that if senators "do not act, I reserve the right to use my recess appointment authority in the future." This seems like a perfectly reasonable use of presidential power–how else is the President going to get things to actually happen in the Senate? The statement makes it seem like there won't be any recess appointments this time around...does that mean that the President is trying to demonstrate that he doesn't want to take too much power away from the Senate?

Bankers do not play baseball

In an interview yesterday, Obama said he didn’t begrudge Wall Street executives' big bonuses. This, while somewhat irritating in the midst of an economic crisis, was then followed by the statement that the $17 million bonus awarded to the chief executive of JP Morgan Chase and the $9 million bonus that went to the Goldman Sachs chief executive were “extraordinary,” but that “there are some baseball players who are making more than that and don’t get to the World Series either, so I’m shocked by that as well.”

First of all, as far as I know, baseball players didn't help to launch us into this economic crisis. Some players with large bonuses may not have gotten to the World Series, but they didn't hurt millions of Americans with their failure either.

Obama then attempted to justify his statement, saying, “I know both those guys; they are very savvy businessmen ... I, like most of the American people, don’t begrudge people success or wealth. That is part of the free-market system.”

Yes, the American people may have chosen the free-market system. They may believe in the American dream, where every little peasant boy and girl can become the next Bill Gates. The American people, however, are probably not thrilled by hearing about these executives' bonuses while they're reading the want ads in the newspaper. Furthermore, these bankers have been extremely dependent on taxpayers' dollars for the past year. They may be "savvy businessmen", but they haven't succeeded recently simply because they were the best in a big game of fair competition.

In Obama's State of the Union speech, he said that he understood "Some [Americans] are frustrated; some are angry. They don't understand why it seems like bad behavior on Wall Street is rewarded but hard work on Main Street isn't ... ", but declared that "To recover the rest [of the money we spent on the banks], I have proposed a fee on the biggest banks. I know Wall Street isn't keen on this idea, but if these firms can afford to hand out big bonuses again, they can afford a modest fee to pay back the taxpayers who rescued them in their time of need."

Obama seemed to understand the frustration many Americans felt when they saw their tax dollars go to the bail outs of companies that lavishly handed out ridiculous bonuses. And then came this interview.

Was his banker/baseball comparison a simple mistake, that he's now looking back on and shaking his head about? Was it an attempt to attempt to appear less anti-business? Did he take conveying his understanding of the average citizen, and support for business at the same time, too far?

A Change in the Tone of Politics? Doubtful.

Remember what President Obama said in the State of the Union speech about trying to fix the problems with how Washington works?

"Washington may think that saying anything about the other side, no matter how false, no matter how malicious, is just part of the game. But it's precisely such politics that has stopped either party from helping the American people. Worse yet, it's sowing further division among our citizens, further distrust in our government.

So, no, I will not give up on trying to change the tone of our politics. I know it's an election year. And after last week, it's clear that campaign fever has come even earlier than usual. But we still need to govern."

That change doesn't seem to be starting just yet.

Last week, Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) placed a blanket hold on at least 70 of President Obama's nominees awaiting confirmation by the Senate. A hold, you'll recall, is a method by which a senator asks to be informed before a particular motion (in this case, the President's nominees) is brought to the floor, thereby stopping the motion from reaching a vote until the hold is removed. After some pretty blunt criticism from the White House, which suggested that the blanket hold was just retaliation after not getting earmarks, the senator lifted some of the holds. The removal of some holds, according to this entry in the NYTimes blog, "may temper a threat by Democratic leaders in the Senate–and even the White House–that the administration would make recess appointments during next week's Presidents' Day break, bucking any notion of senators' approval."

Though Sen. Shelby's spokesperson later said that the senator wanted to draw attention to issues of national security and was unconcerned with earmarks, it turns out there has been a conflict between Boeing and Northrop Grumman over who will get the contract for an Air Force (an issue of national security?) aerial refueling tanker (giving it to Northrop would create jobs in Alabama, Sen. Shelby's state). Sounds like an earmark to me... But either way, the blanket hold (not just on nominees associated with the aforementioned conflict) just seems like a really disruptive bid for attention. Is preventing the government from functioning efficiently (appointing people to positions that need to be filled) really a good way to draw attention to a problem? The tactic does attract attention, but that attention probably isn't a good thing; Shelby and his blanket hold have been subject to ridicule over the last week. Do the holds give the White House more reason to make recess appointments so that Shelby doesn't win anything but a designation as a symbol of the unhelpful, inefficient game of American politics? After all, the government needs to govern.

Listen to your parents!

Yeah... I can't believe I just said that. But according to the Kaiser Family Foundation, average kids from ages 8-18 spend roughly 7.5 hours a day watching TV, using their cellphones, listening to music, playing video games, using the computer and so on. How is that a bad thing? Well according to Kim Painter of USA Today “Many experts, including the pediatrics academy, consider that much screen time bad for mental and physical health”

(at least HE'S a level 80 warlock)

This is where parents come in. Studies have shown that kids whose parents set rules spend 3 hours less on the computer or TV. They also

-Do better in school

-Drive safer

-And have a lower chance of smoking.

Now don’t start ruling your kids with an iron fist, parents. The most effective parents not only set rules, but enforce those rules in a supportive and kind way.

Wall Street Strikes Back

JPMorganChase has always been a strong supporter of the Democratic Party, and its chief executive Jamie Dimon is a good friend of President Obama's. Jamie Dimon is a frequent White House Guest, and a large donor to the Democratic Party. So it was somewhat expected that this trend would continue. It kind of did, Chase still contributed to some individual Democrats and state organizations. "But it has rebuffed solicitations from the National Democratic House and Senate campaign committees. Instead, it gave $30,000 to their Republican Counterparts." This change reflects the anger of Chase, and its attempt to challenge President Obama's tighter financial regulations proposals. The Republican party is rushing to capitalize on this current dissent from Wall Street. Even though some of the big shots in Wall Street may be Obama fans, they say that they are not going to stand for being bossed around. They will begin to withhold their money. It has become expected that they will donate, even if they are bossed around. But now these Wall Streeters are not going to play that game anymore. These people on wall street are saying that if Obama keeps taking stabs to punish or hurt them, they may have to rethink where their political allegiances lie.

-Jane Hayashi-

Sarah Palin Political Cartoon

Click on the title of this to be directed to a political cartoon of Sarah Palin holding a tea pot overflowing with money with a speech bubble saying "Now THIS is MY kind of party". This cartoon is one example of the many different opinions on Palin's recent surge into the public. As I said in one of my previous posts, I wondered about and asked you all for your input on why Palin was suddenly putting herself out in the public eye again. So here is a follow up for you. Some critics believe that Sarah Palin has only one motive for reappearing, and that is money. She is now becoming so popular, especially now that she is a Fox commentator, and recently she was paid $100,000 for her speech and appearance at the Tea Party Convention. So this political cartoon just further satirizes Palin's intentions, and brings attention to the belief that all she wants is money.

-Jane Hayashi-

Connecticut Gas Blast

Earlier today, in Middletown, Connecticut, tragedy struck when an unfinished power plant exploded, killing at least 5 workers with more than a dozen workers injured. This explosion occurred at the Kleen Energy Systems, and the boom was felt and heard for miles. This power plant was being built to produce energy using primarily natural gases. At the time, there seem to be no workers who are unaccounted for, and the cause of the gas explosion is still unknown. The explosion tore apart the outside of the power plant, but the building, roof and the smokestacks are still in tact. In a statement made by the town's mayor, the power plant was supposedly 95% complete. Natural gases are responsible for about 1/5 of the nation's electricity. INvestigation of this explosion and its causes begin on Monday. Allegedly, workers at the plant were purging the gas lines, a method that has been under scrutiny since an explosion at a Slim Jim factory occurred last year. "The [Safety] Board voted last week to recommend that national and international code writers strengthen their guidelines to require outdoor venting of gas lines or an approved safety plan to do it indoors." This is such a tragic thing that has happened, and hopefully this will lead to some investigation into preventing other occurrences like this from ever happening again.

-Jane Hayashi-

Pakistan Bombings

On Friday, 33 people were killed and about 150 others were wounded in a bus bombing in Karachi, Pakistan. Thousands of people gathered in Karachi for a mass funeral, to mourn for those lives that were lost. Shops, schools, and offices were closed down, and the amount of public transportation was decreased while people poured into the city. As of now, it seems that these people are grief-stricken, and not to angered, but rather are focusing on mourning their losses, and consoling to families and friends of the deceased. But it is expected that as soon as the shock begins to wear off, these families will become angered at the failure of the cities security. There were 2 bombs planted on buses, which were set off at the same time on Friday, and a third bomb went off outside of a hospital where the wounded were being taken. The buses were full of Shia worshippers. As of now, 20 suspects have been rounded up, but many speculate about the reasons for this bombings. Karachi is no stranger to this violence, and believe the people who bombed the city want to destabilize the city. Karachi is said to be strategic city, since it is a port city. Karachi is the financial heart of Pakistan. It is believed that the Jundallah (the Army of God) is behind this attack. The Jundallah is also the group that was behind the Ashura attack, another bomb attack which killed 43 people in a Shia procession. It is just so shocking that these acts of terrorism are occurring, I guess all for power of the country. But who really knows what the motives of these attacks truly are.

-Jane Hayashi-

NFL Hall of Fame

Today, Jerry Rice and Emmett Smith were elected into the NFL Hall of Fame. After all, both of these men have won 3 Superbowl titles, as well as being the MVP in one of those Superbowl championships. In order to be elected to the Hall of Fame, each candidate must gain an 80% nomination from the 44 media members. Each of these men will be inducted into the Pro Football Hall of Fame in Canton, Ohio on August 7. Each of these men achieved great things in their careers, Rice was the NFL's career receiving and touchdowns leader, while Smith was the top rusher. Both men, when commenting on their nomination began to tear up, something you would never expect from these men. It showed just how much it meant to them, and Rice claimed he could never take this for granted, and compared it to the feeling of winning the Superbowl. These men were nominated alongside John Randle, Russ Grimm, Rickey Jackson, Floyd Little, and Dick LeBeau. This comes at such a great time, as tomorrow is the Superbowl. Personally, I am glad they were nominated, and share along in their joy. Even though Jerry Rice is such a huge celebrity, he never seems to take his fame for granted. He can sometimes be seen walking around in downtown San Mateo, and was recently seen eating at local restaurant Baywatch.

-Jane Hayashi-

No more trips to the moon?

Obama is planning on increasing NASA's funding by 2%, while getting rid of manned space flights. If this budget is approved by Congress, then it's pretty much the end of sending astronauts to the moon.

Although I'm quite disappointed that we won't be seeing a moon base anytime in the future, I do understand Obama's plan. There are disadvantages of sending astronauts to space to perform tasks

1) It costs a few hundred times MORE cash to send astronauts to space than it does to send only satellites. George W. Bush planned on sending astronauts to the moon and Mars, but soon gave up the plan because it was too expensive.

2) Almost all the important discoveries about space and astronomy have been made by unmanned satellites, and most of the machinery needed to perform future research about space won't require astronauts. Actually, because the Hubble Telescope was built by astronauts, the telescope could not be sent millions of miles away from Earth to capture better photos (and it cost much more to have the telescope installed by astronauts).

There are just so many benefits if NASA plans to not send humans to the Moon and Mars. Think about it, sending hundreds of satellites to Mars instead of a manned mission is actually much cheaper and efficient. I guess visiting the moon won’t be happening in my lifetime.

(Or having the chance to meeting a hot alien...)

Sarah Palin

After a semi-hiatus from Sarah Palin, we have found out recently that she is back and ready for action. Supposedly, as she is the new correspondent for Fox News, Palin is getting a television studio built into her living room, courtesy of Fox! She is also becoming quite active on facebook and twitter. It seems that she is working her way up to become more vocal, and prevalent in our everyday world. She has a busy weekend ahead of her, including a speech to the Salina, Kansas Chamber of Commerce, she is headlining a national Tea Party convention, and is appearing on behalf of a Texas Governor's re-election campaign. Palin has began to utilize her technological side, announcing on Facebook that she was calling for the resignation of White House chief of staff, Rahm Emmanuel, who publicly used the word "retarded". I personally think that announcing this on Facebook is very unprofessional, and kind of wierd. This is a member of our government she is speaking about, not a friend she met on Facebook. This sudden act of activity of Palin's part has sparked quite a bit of scrutiny. People are wondering what exactly her motives are for putting herself out there so much. Some believe her goals may include a presidential run, a role as a leader of the Tea Party movement, a possible career in the media, or as a media entity, or maybe some combination of them all. Maybe she is just going for the shock value, and all of the free press that she is gaining from this. Seeing as none of us truly know what is going on inside of Sarah Palin's head, I guess we will all just have to wait and see what her next move will be.

-Jane Hayashi-

The SUPERBOWL!!!

So as we all (hopefully) know, this Sunday is the Superbowl. It looks like it is going to be a good game this year, I mean the Colts v. the Saints? It could be a pretty close game! But the even crazier thing involving the Superbowl is not the actual game or the players, but rather the Superbowl commercials. Did you all know that a 30 second commercial costs about a little over 3 million dollars!?!?! I cannot imagine paying 3 million dollars for just 30 seconds. But I guess that the Superbowl commercials have become so well known and so powerful and viewed, that people are willing to pay the price. These commercials are often very clever, and are always widely anticipated. There's almost as much hype about these as the actual game! OK well this was just a little aside for you all. Wonder who you all are rooting for. Personally I love Peyton Manning, and might be rooting for the Colts, but I also like Reggie Bush, so I could be ok with a Saints win.

-Jane Hayashi-

The Whole Healthcare Issue

Next year, our government programs will account for over half of our countries health-care spending. More and more people are turning to things such as medicaid, and taking business away from the private industries. These governmental programs are taking such a toll on our spending, and are adding to our national deficit (which is over 1 trillion dollars). On top of that, health-care costs continue to rise, which draws even more customers away from private industries. Our rising dependency on programs such as Medicare and Medicaid is causing an overall increase in health-care spending. Many states are currently finding it quite difficult to fund their medicaid programs, and so Obama has called for 25 billion dollars of federal money to be used to help cover these costs. While the whole health-care issue continues on, I just cannot fathom how large our deficit will become, and how dangerous all of this is.

-Jane Hayashi-

H1N1 Now

Just a few months ago, Swine Flu was such a big deal. Now it seems like it is just a joke made in passing. I am not trying to say that the H1N1 virus is not a big deal, my Uncle was just diagnosed with it, and I know a few others who have as well. But why is it that this "epidemic" was such a controversy, but now it seems like people have some new "fad" to obsess about. This country has made 120 million vaccines which have been distributed nationwide, yet only about 70 million have actually been used. And it is said that 35 million more have been made, but are obviously not needed, and may be donated overseas. Personally, I got my H1N1 shot with my mom. It was after the beginning of the whole scare, and was only about a month ago. But it was the personal decision of my family to get it. I just do not understand why, if everyone was so scared of it we now have such a surplus of the vaccine. It obviously is a health issue, but it could have been amplified by word of mouth and the media?

-Jane Hayashi-

Haitian Kidnappings

Last week, 10 American Missionaries attempted to smuggle 33 Haitian children out of the country without the consent of the Haiti government. These 10 Americans claimed that they were trying to help these children by bringing them to an orphanage in the Dominican Republic. But, they do acknowledge the fact that they failed to attain the necessary documents and approval for the right to move these children. As a result, the 10 missionaries have been charged with child abduction and criminal conspiracies. If convicted, these missionaries face up to 15 years in Haitian prison for the child abduction charges, and up to 9 years for the conspiracy charges. Luckily for these Americans, the prosecutor decided not to charge them with the most serious of charges, that of trafficking. The judge, under Haitian law, has up to 3 months to decide whether or not to pursue this issue any further, in which case, the missionaries will probably have to stay in Haitian prison, since bail is not very common in Haiti. Some of the children who were being transported to the Dominican Republic, still had living parents, whom claim that the missionaries told them that they would only be taking the children to educate them, and that they would be allowed to visit. This whole thing seems a little sketchy to me. How do you all feel? Was this an act done in malice or for personal gain, or were these missionaries actually trying to help these tragedy stricken children? Personally, I believe that they were trying to help these children. It is such a mess in Haiti,and is full of chaos. Moving these children, where they could have access to food, water, and shelter is a help.

-Jane Hayashi-

Toyota Recall

In January of 2010, Toyota recalled 2.3 million cars, because of a faulty gas pedal. It seems that Toyota is working at a very rapid rate to fix this issue, but it still seems like a scary one. I mean, with all of the different recalls, such as Toyota and Lexus there just seems like too many. Many Toyota owners are standing by Toyota, and believe that they are working as fast as they can to fix the problem. But there are also many others who think that this is the last straw, and they are over Toyota. How do you all feel? This is obviously a safety issue, and hopefully Toyota will win back over the support of their consumers soon.

-Jane Hayashi-

Recent drop in the stock market

Today the stock market suffered a big drop. The Dow Jones dropped 268 points today, and nasdaq was down 65 points. Analysts seem to think that this has a huge relationship with the Job Report, and unemployment rates that come out tomorrow. Economic analysts have thought that the economy has been getting better, due to many different factors, the biggest being that consumer faith and spending has increased recently. Hopefully the job report that comes out tomorrow will be better than expected, but as far as we know, the amount of first time people applying for unemployment. This is a disappointment that our economy has been looking like it was getting better, but in one day takes such a big hit. Hopefully the results will be more positive than expected!

-Jane Hayashi-

Wives standing by their cheating husbands

The issue of men in the public eye cheating on their wives has begun to pop up all over the place. It seemed that this whole debacle began with John Edwards and Elizabeth Edwards. When it came out that John Edwards had cheated on his wife Elizabeth, a whole flurry of criticisms of the issue came out. But what made the situation even worse, was the fact that he cheated while she was dealing with being diagnosed with and fighting cancer. Despite this horrible act of infidelity, Elizabeth Edwards chose to stand by her husband, and stay with him. She chose to bear this act of betrayal, and was always next to her husband as he ran his bid for president in the 2008 election. The shocker was when she found out that he had actually fathered a child with his mistress. After this, Elizabeth finally decided to leave her husband. Another example, is the infamous Tiger Woods scandal. Although his wife, Elin has made no concrete decision on whether or not to leave him or stand by him, there are rumors going around that she plans on taking him back. What is it that causes these women to stay with their husbands? Other politicians have cheated on their wives, and had their wives stand by them. It is under scrutiny that the women have their own agendas which take priority to their marriages. But, there must be some underlying reason women just can't bear to leave their husbands, even when the ultimate act of betrayal has taken place.

-Jane Hayashi-

Don't Ask, Don't Tell

In recent news, the topic of gays in the military has come under scrutiny. The Republican party has decided to argue that the policy of "Don't ask, Don't tell" in the military needs to end. And with the help of President Obama, the law may be repealed. I believe that if a citizen of this country wants to join the military to help protect this country, their sexual orientation should hold no precedent over that. I believe that the "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy has been a good one, but there are always going to be the worry that the gay member of the military will be found out. How does whether one like men or women, affect one's ability to serve his or her country. As long as no sexual relations, which are banned for any member of the military are occurring, gays in the military should be allowed to serve. I don't have a concrete opinion on the policy, because i don't know how it would really affect the comradarie of a company in the military. But as for now, as long as one's work is not affected by your sexual orientation, then sexual orientation should not be considered when one wants to join the military.

-Jane Hayashi-

Ask, Tell

On January 27th, President Obama wanted to get the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law repealed. He planned to "work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are."

Now Adm. Michael G. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates are both fighting to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". Gates stated that ""The question before us is not whether the military prepares to make this change, but how we best prepare for it"

"Don't Ask Don't Tell" seems like a good policy right? Just don't talk about your personal life, and everything will be alright. Alexander Nicholson from The Huffington Post sums it up in the correct light. "'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' still sounds very rational and fair to many -- no one will ask you, and as long as you don't go around throwing your private life in everyone's face there won't be a problem. This common misinterpretation of the policy is what also leads many young gay and lesbian recruits, including myself at one time, to believe that life under 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' won't be so bad. The more accurate name for the policy, 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Happen to Get Found Out, Any Time, Any Place, In Any Way'..."

In 2009, 428 gays were discharged.

I don't see why sexual orientation should be important in the military or in any job. As long as it doesn't effect the person's work or performance, it shouldn't be a big deal.

Gearing Up for 2010 Winter Games Vancouver

As Vancouver gears up to host the 2010, so are 15,000 armed men and women to make sure that the Olympic games stay safe this year. Canada is spending the most they've ever spent on a security operation in their history: a whopping $900 million. "Bud Mercer, RCMP assistant commissioner, describes it as 'planning for 17 Super Bowls in a row, day after day.'"

Since there is a large stretch of road 2 hours North of Vancouver, 4500 Canadian forces have been put on reserve should the need arise to activate them. There are also 900 security cameras all linked together in a network to detect biological, radiological, and chemical threats. "Frigates and destroyers will monitor approaches to Vancouver Harbor, says Rear Adm. Tyrone Pile of the Canadian Navy, and a close eye will be kept on all ship traffic approaching the west coasts of Canada and the United States."

This effort has taken 5 years to plan out and finally put into action, claims the Canadian armed forces. Even 40 agencies from the US are setting up a command station in WA to coordinate NORAD air restrictions way into US territory in case anything goes haywire.

With armed forces watching everyone's move, will the Olympic games feel like the actual Olympic games? Oh, and the US and Canadian officials say they don't want the security to feel overly obvious. but with 15,000? hmm.