A TAKE ON INTERROGATION

A take on interrogation.  There is much news about enhanced interrogation and the Senate committee investigation has taken five years.  I am not familiar with torture but I have conducted a few interrogations.  Interrogation is the strong word for an interview.  Police officers do this all the time and during an interview it can rapidly change to a custodial interrogation.  When it becomes accusatory we are obligated to remind the person of their right to an attorney before they divulge information.

This has little to do with terrorist interrogation except for the fact of the psychology behind the questioning and what makes a terrorist submit to the truth.  In criminal work it is very simple the culprit is an opportunist or has low intelligence.  They calculate the benefit of  cooperation with what the police already know versus the consequences.  They have either been caught “red handed” or are escaping the inevitable.  Often because of their intelligence the police manipulate them into confession or collusion giving up information.

This really has little to do with a zealot ideologue willing to give their life for their cause.  This is why terrorist interrogators need to be specially trained and given latitude if information is to be gained.  I understand that in water-boarding the method is to ask a series of three questions, two of which the interrogator already knows the answer.  If the interrogatee does not answer the two correctly he is deprived of oxygen with a towel over their face being soaked with water.  Terrorists are declined on a board and have the sensation of drowning.  The terrorist is prepared by several days of sleep  deprivation, changes in diet and their usual atmosphere of stability.    The effects are dramatic and regardless of what anyone says it could be very effective.  The human body wards off further threats and adapts to what prevents the harm.  In this case the truth, and there is great fear of lies rooted in survival.  It can be associated with the “Stockholm  Syndrome” collaboration through hopelessness.  Long after water-boarding the interrogatee will tell the truth knowing it can be gained anyway.  This is deemed by some to be tortuous and most Marines would call it boot camp.  A system of disorientation.

This procedure is applied to many aspects of military training to prepare people for the possibility of capture by the enemy.  It does not have any lasting physical effects if applied correctly.  The mental aspects probably are lifelong, I really don’t care about a terrorist and a lifetime of therapy if it saves American lives.

To exacerbate the subject is to throw American lives under the bus, apparently the politicians do not care?  Nor are they interested in preventing further terrorism.  They will tout that the information gained is incorrect, my response would be the system was not applied correctly.  They will say the information can be gained in another manner, lots of luck.   Police can lie and deceive, playing good cop and bad cop and still usually it is not enough. We have to offer an incentive or disparity to gain confession.   If we are dealing with someone willing to give their life for the cause it is silly to believe we can convert them to our ideology.  It is very unintelligent to think otherwise and I would not stake the fate of thousands of Americans on a whim or theory. 

This has even gone further and it is not discussed.  Under this administration terrorism has been criminalized.  We take terrorists into custody and advise them of their right to an attorney.  This is true of foreign nationals taken into custody on foreign soil as I understand it.  Yet, we kill Americans on foreign soil using drone strikes without a trial verdict.  That is another opinion in the future, our media gives us many convoluted theories that are expressed without the benefit of knowledge or experience.

Peter Risatti

THE GARNER INCIDENT

The Garner incident.  I’m weighing in and really have a hard time fathoming the bad luck  everyone concerned had.  Garner a thirty time loser with police seemed to work every angle he could to get arrested.  It is unfortunate that our society has people like this.

The cops, including the cop behind Garner, Pantelleo, were acting upon store owner complaints of Garner harassing customers and selling cigarettes illegally.   Excuse me if I simplify the incident.  Police answer the call and evaluate that Garner is not going to be arrested easily, for whatever reason they are reluctant to Taser.  They decide on a back-up of officers and what I saw on the video looks to be four competent police officers confronting a giant of a man.  Garner was not submitting to the arrest.  This is a fairly common scenario.  The exception is a suspect that weighs 350 pounds and is very capable of injuring anyone trying to apprehend him.

The only thing in common with the Ferguson event is a very large man, angry and capable of maiming any police officer within reach.  Garner does not appear to be aggressive, however he is not compliant.  This passiveness is not something taken as permanent and the situation can change in a fraction of a second.  The arrest is inevitable.  Police don’t just arbitrarily call for back-up.  Officers that respond are not happy with officers calling for an assistance without just cause.  In this case Garner’s size is enough to speculate the damage he could physically do.  I believe they were trying to apprehend him with as little physical harm as possible. That is why they chose the multiple officer arrest procedure.

Police, really desire to go home to their loved ones after a tour of duty.  A very rough physical confrontation with an adversary can change that.  It is nothing anyone looks forward to.   It is evident that Garner was surrounded and would be overcome and handcuffed.  I did not see any blows struck and it was mostly all about restraint.  I think any cop watching knew Garner was going to be grabbed by the neck by the officer behind him.  One officer approached from the front drawing Garner’s attention,  the officer behind grabs him for control.  Two other officers await until the struggle ensues, it is all about restraint.  At this point everything is very professional, taking him down, incapacitating,  hand-cuffing, and neutralizing the situation.

The physical contact begins and Garner is saying that he cannot breath, as a doctor said to me, “If he could not breath he would not be talking.”  Someone choking in a restaurant gurgles or gasps they do not recite two sentences.  Garner falls victim to other physical heart problems, asthma and overweight restrained breathing, compounded by physical exertion, anxiety of the event and chest pressure of being held down.  The autopsy revealed that Garner’s tracheal airway did not suffer damage, apparently indicating he was not strangled.  Pantalleo is the alleged cause of the death.  But, I have not heard anyone say that he was ordered by the police officer supervisor at the scene to not act in the manner that he did in effecting the arrest.  That would indicate to me that the supervisor approved of the conduct or would have testified at the Grand Jury that the police officers were acting contrary to instructions.

It is an unfortunate event, we need to be careful what we take away from it.   It is only racial in the eyes of a racist.  Angered physical contact between human beings, even in a sporting event like football has some traumatic consequences.  This is not a sporting event, but foreseeable with the medical problems and not submitting to arrest.  Unless there is information I am not privy to, I would agree with the grand jury.  There was not any specific intent or negligence just a very unfortunate event.

Peter Risatti

IMMIGRATION

Immigration, in the news and being used to intimidate the unsuspecting. This subject has been beaten to a pulp but still requires defining. Recently there have been several articles in the Eagle expressing how we should welcome immigration.  We do, if it is through the selection process like so many of our ancestors accomplished.  Many, blow off the harm that illegal immigration creates.  It destabilizes our economy, the employment opportunity, our medical, educational and welfare programs.   Illegal is not just against the law it is erratic and cannot be controlled toward stabilization.  It is erratic because it cannot be rationed on the needs of the country.  Again, it is expressed that the country can absorb it.  The “Boomers” are moving into retirement at the rate of ten-thousand per day.  Living longer than ever before and will require resources that there is not an adequate supply of.  Social Security, Medicare, Senior Housing, etc. are under-funded now and unsustainable in the future.  The Boomers are on a direct collision course with amnesty and are destined to lose.  Our poor compete every day for low income housing with the illegal guests.

I have mentioned several times, the number of undocumented citizens that we have is greatly underestimated.  Not by a simple amount, when the true figures come in we will realize the dilemma before us.  We are missing the count by millions.  The closest evidence is the amount of Non English speaking residents versus the alleged amount of illegal residents.  If they are not able to speak English they are not citizens.  We hear of the harm caused by amnesty and still it is sought by many.  Amnesty is a very forgiving word.  It was granted under the Reagan Administration in the 80’s and has formed the night-mare we are living now.

This opinion will get the usual disagreement from people that will boast how immigration built this country.  They are not accounting for the shortcoming of every government program that includes our illegal guests.  They will exclaim they are needed for menial jobs that nobody else wants to do.  Well, I see many menial jobs in the Want Adds and still there are many illegal guests on our welfare rolls, this presents a conundrum.  Some of the people condemning illegal occupancy are the first to hire them, saving money.  Much of the money the guests make is sent Western Union back to their home country.  Observe the Price Chopper service desk on a Thursday or Friday night.  There thousands of dollars are being sent to foreign countries,  a fact of life.  The part that nauseates me is the fact that so much of the money sent is taxpayer subsidized.  They are here for opportunity, earning a wage or having it given to them. Their allegiance is to their family in their former country.  The baloney we hear about escaping political abuse is hogwash it is like most crime and tied to monetary opportunity.  Of course, there are some that are escaping persecution. If the situation was reversed, we were the ones living in the foreign country we would want family members to go where it is the most lucrative and share whatever bounty they achieve.  

Amnesty, is the slap in the face we give legal immigrants that have played by the book.  We are a nation of laws that protect the citizenry although this is not recognized by politicians seeking the immigrant vote.  The silent majority remains intact and I wonder how much harm they will endure before they get off their duff and stand accountable?

Before chirping how bigoted this opinion is, walk a mile in a senior citizen’s shoes and the prospects for their future.  Many have paid into a system they can only hope to benefit from.   The Obama Burger, get the large, the guy behind you pays for it, in this case the guy behind us is our grand children.

Peter Risatti

SAVING OUR MILITARY

Our military participants and where they come from.  We are one of the luckiest nations on earth; our military is 100% voluntary.  Military veterans are less than 11.5% of the legal population.  Not everyone can qualify; just to be accepted is an accomplishment.   Once accepted and having served honorably the individual is a member of a special group.

Unless we are in close association with the military it is an unfamiliar culture.  However, awareness of American history can inspire military interest. The inspiration can lead to participation.  The interest can be personal needs, including patriotism, employment, education, or adventure. Planning a military career is an avenue to experience and education, the means to a specific goal.   If the enlistment is not compatible, it only needs to be endured for a minimal amount of time.  The many mistakes we can make in life there are few that offer a termination with honor after a few years.  Not boasting Army slogans,  “We really can be, all that we can be.”  We leave the military having gained knowledge of interacting with other Americans under exacting conditions.   The military experience is a lesson in social survival for Americans.

Our military has the greatest defense capability in the world, regarded as fierce and respected until the last few years of faltering. One set back in the last seventy years was the Vietnam War, initiated and administered politically.  We learned, or should have learned, it was a disastrous endeavor. The drastic military changes from the Nixon to Carter Administrations severely weakened our nation but the basic principles were still intact.  Under President Reagan our military recovered greatness, shedding some balance to the world powers.  Occasionally, someone none military, changes our military structure it is usually a detriment. It is often under the guise of modernization; the result is foolhardiness that sacrifices safety and American lives.

Our military is succumbing again to political domination; our military is under pressure constantly to maintain efficient standing with world respect.  I trust America will survive, many senior citizens are doubtful. Our fortitude is being tested in the most stressful atmosphere we have had to endure.  The patriotism that wells up in our chest when we look at the flag or hear our national anthem will be in our souls forever. The legacy continuing long after we have closed our eyes for eternity.  That patriotism cannot be taken from us. The soldiers stricken while carrying our flag know another will follow in their footsteps, taking up where they leave off.  We are Americans, with 238 years of freedom experience and a pencil-necked politician will not permanently diminish our freedom.  Our constitution protects our rights, strengthening our legacy. Interestingly, I do not know of an American Veteran who gave their life for socialism.  We use the soldier and their blood. If it is merely for political gain Americans need to speak out.

Insuring liberty means choosing our government carefully.  Political candidates should be vetted and nothing left to “That’s good enough.”  We need rational, well-planned leadership decisions of where our country is, where we want it to go and who will get us there.  We should demand responsibility from people elected to office.  We need to clean up our own political parties for good government.  Honesty should be a policy not an occurrence. Our government formulates our military; our military insures our freedom.

Our national safety is the issue.  Safe guards have to be maintained and functional.  Threatening events occur, it is irrational to think they will not occur in our lifetime, they have and they will.  Military life is not for everyone, but for those choosing the military we are grateful.  We have the option of not serving, we better damn sure hope someone else does.  We need to encourage and maintain a feasible and attractive lifestyle for the Americans that do.  Supporting our military will ensure our nation’s future.

Peter Risatti

THE NEW IRAQ WAR

The new Iraq War.  We are inclined to elect presidents that promise us peace and prosperity.  It is impossible to foresee if they can deliver on their campaign promises.  Their plans and projections are often unattainable.    I wonder if we are attracted to a candidate that can lie better than their opponent?

            I am a veteran of the Vietnam War or “Johnson’s War.”   The Vietnam War was a political debacle, conducted by an administration thinking only of their political future.  I think we are repeating such a dilemma again.  Iraq was the Nemesis of President GW Bush in 2003.  He insisted Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs) and the Iraqi people would rise up and support a regime change.  One element of proposing the conflict in Iraq declared Iraq was central and detrimental to peace in the Middle East.   After many years of war, four thousand deaths and thirty-two thousand casualties later our military secured Iraq. 

            For everyone anti Iraq War, it was all in vane.  They thought it was a war of stupidity and the consequences of our losses were borne by GW Bush politically.  Many could not wait to end that war.  In 2008, the candidate that promised Iraqi withdrawal was Obama.  As proposed, President Obama withdrew our forces from Iraq in 2010.  There was controversy at the time if this was a wise decision.  Not heeding the warnings of terrorism and failing to leave U.S. security forces in place was a mistake.   By determining the Iraq war successful and final it helped the Obama re-election in 2012.  

            Terrorists known as ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) have decimated the Iraqi peace.  As predicted, the vacuum left by U.S. withdrawal allowed militant terrorist to move into Iraq.  ISIS is murdering the Christians and Kurds of Northern Iraq.  It has been in the news several times in the last two years but apparently only civilians were paying attention or cared.  Of the over one hundred intelligence briefings by our national intelligence our Commander in Chief missed meetings sixty percent of the time. That probably accounts for his lapse in judgment?   Recently, many major cities in Iraq fell to terrorist at an alarming rate that could not be ignored.  This is the same Iraq that many felt was not deserving of U.S. intervention in 2003.  ISIS murdering Kurds and Christians, the same as Saddam did previously.  The former alleged WMDs are not an issue this time, it was speculated they were moved to Syria in 2003.  Similar, if not the same WMDs were found in Syria after being used by President Assad of Syria in his continuing war against ISIS in 2013.  After condemnation by the U.S. and United Nations Assad stopped WMD use and agreed to their destruction. Their origin was never determined.  Ironically, and without justification, Assad was using WMDs on the same people we are bombing now, ISIS.

            We bomb ISIS daily and have implored much of the free world to assist us.  We have over two thousand military personnel in Iraq apparently wearing slippers?  It is reported there are “No Boots on the Ground.”  The national media is responding to lies about a “Time line of terror” in the region. We are not admitting the folly of removing all troops from Iraq in 2010.  But, we are leaving ten thousand troops behind when we leave Afghanistan this year.  It would mean that we have second thoughts about occupational security after having sacrificed so much for a country’s stability.

            In all probability the Iraq War will escalate.  A solution not gained without an occupying ground force.  I have sympathy for the Iraqi natives that undergo the chaos, the terror of ISIS and our bombing.  I have even more sympathy for our Americans that have to remedy a situation that should not have been.  There is something about bleeding to death for political ineptness that is plainly unjust.

Peter Risatti

THE FERGUSON MESSAGE

  A man six foot four inches tall, weighing 303 pounds and allegedly shot by police while unarmed.  The officer, is of average height and build, and attacked after initial confrontation with the deceased.  There is a physical struggle and necessary for the officer to retain possession of his police firearm.  The officer gains control of his weapon and the assailant/deceased is alleged to retreat. Something in the mind set of the deceased encouraged him to re-engage the police officer and it was a fatal decision.  It is alleged the deceased hands are raised in surrender.

What transpired during and after the incident is really not a mystery.  It is logical in the mindset of a police officer that has been attacked in similar circumstances.  Confronting a person with physical characteristics of a World Wrestling performer and having the ability to inflict great physical harm is more than a challenge.  The officer, if average size, is at a tremendous disadvantage.  Size is a crucial element in physical confrontation.  In real life and death situations I look back over my career and if I had been any smaller I would not be writing this now.  There is not a salary paid that equates to fighting for our lives.  The officer was treated medically for a fractured eye socket sustained from the encounter.

The deceased was the suspected perpetrator of a store unarmed robbery.  The televised video indicates he robbed a store and physically assaulted the clerk, stealing fifty dollars worth of cigars, fifteen minutes before he was shot.  This video should have been released on the day of the shooting.  In Massachusetts Chapter 265-19, Unarmed robbery can carry a felony punishment of twenty years to life sentence.  So, this is not some pickpocket stealing lunch money. We can assume the mindset of the deceased was not one of kindness in the time frame of the robbery to the shooting.

Much is said about the officer not knowing about the robbery and confronting the deceased in broad daylight in the middle of the street.  Police do not customarily use physical force for J-walking, especially on a perpetrator nearly twice our size.  Nor do we awaken and start the day planning a shooting. The officer's service record will reveal how many confrontations he has had over J-walking.  To speculate as the media does on ridiculous conclusions is just plain silly without research.

The gunshot wounds to the victim, six in all, from the front.  He was not retreating or running away, he decided to re-engage the officer.  It is reasonable to deduct that the two head wounds of the deceased are the final wounds.  The other four wounds are in the right hand and arm.  I suggest the four arm wounds are the beginning of a series of discharged bullets indicating the officer was bringing his weapon up to a firing position with necessary haste.  If he had his weapon trained on the deceased intending on execution, as alleged, I doubt if he had been aiming at the victim’s hand.  If the victim’s hands were raised, as alleged, it would be a little improbable that the officer was aiming over the victim’s head, firing as he brought the weapon down.  The bullet trajectory will be assessed and should reveal the position of the arm when it was wounded.  The bullet trajectory of the head wounds should reveal more evidence and will under more scrutiny. If the deceased was not advancing on the officer that would give time for more calculated marksmanship and the wounds do not indicate that.  A toxicology result from the autopsy will reveal any controlled substance abuse.  This is an opinion, based solely on my own practical experiences; we will witness a circus the news media will make of this tragedy.  We have lived through similar events.  It is unfortunate that it ever happened.

Peter Risatti

THE PARADOX OF EFFECTING VOTING

For the thirty-four years, throughout my police career, I voted as an Independent.  My reasoning was a nonpartisan position could not be associated with being politically biased.  It worked. 

I have learned the political affiliations we create in our lives influence our decisions, our social relationships and our quality of life.  Certain beliefs we adhere to through our environment and experiences will form our ideology.  As an independent it was easier to read the newspaper and whenever a political scandal erupted it was nice not to have the affiliation.  I also learned that “Absolute power corrupts absolutely,” one-party rule is just that.  A two party system is the watchdog that keeps the wolves at bay.  The rules of hierarchy in politics dictate that second best is not in control but they are looking for the event that will put them in control.  Control, is the goal for political gain.

There are several political parties, with only two giants in the room.  Hardly a giant in Massachusetts, the Republicans are 11% of the voters.  Democrats are 39% and independent noncommittal voters account for 50%.  About half of everything that happens in life from relationships, work, religion and politics is noncommittal.  When we read this we reject the premise that noncommittal voting is lacking responsibility and deference to good government.  Studying voters around us we can analyze how committed they are and for what duration, it is usually dependent on needs, their needs.

Continuing the same process without getting our hands dirty.  Assessing the government we get is the parody of effective voting.

Sitting on a fence it is easier to switch pastures if the grass looks a little greener in the other fellow’s yard.  The problem arises when the grass can look greener but the eventual flavor might not be of our liking.  The political parties have figured this and just rely on the independents to be very fickle.  Raise the “Problem de Jour” and see how many take the bait without research.  They raise the premise of a “War on Women” they know the fickle vote is not one of reason, mostly spontaneity.  The independent vote empowers Democratic control, as 61% of Massachusetts cannot stand united.

It is not a wonder that so many government programs are never terminated after decades of substantiated failure.  Fifty percent of the voters are not committed to eliminating corruption.  The benefits of voting non-committal are minimal and for influencing governmental change.  When the outcome depends on a fickle opinion how strong can it be?   Change should come about only when there are two closely viable entities vying for the same control.  The only thing that disrupts government more is the apathetic nonvoter, the epitome of a depressed government, “You can‘t blame me, I didn’t vote.”   Now, is that a convoluted conclusion?  Inspiration for change would be new candidates with 11% participation there is little incentive.   Primaries are the tickle processes we use; enough agitation from a loud ideology and the platform of the party will change.  Why?  The apathetic nonvoter relinquishes and the fickle voter guarantees the process. 

How many people know what an independent voter actually has for benefits?  Only one, I know of, they can determine what primary they vote in. Some consider it two chances of eliminating the candidate they do not want to run against the person they want to win. I’ve never heard it was successful. 

The Independent’s voting ballot is the same as everyone’s in the general election, with the same choices. Independents alone, voting without commitment, may readily be part of the problem and not the solution.  Apathetic voters are suppressed not to vote by choice.  So, there we have it, apathy and fickleness determine our governmental process and then we criticize the result.   How many think it was a hard fought, honest campaign that brought us our leadership?   Wouldn’t it be nice?

Peter Risatti

THE PARADOX OF GUN CONTROL

The commonwealth’s gun control regulations are themselves a paradox, creating an undue burden for the disadvantaged on one hand and unintended, sometimes deadly results on the other. Obeying the law, we rarely think about the consequences of owning a firearm. It has been stated that there are more gun owners in Berkshire County than either registered Democrats or Republicans. There is a proposal in the legislature to further tighten access to firearms in our state. Local residents have a vested interest in current and future restrictions and regulations imposed on their right to posses firearms.

We have heard, “If gun control worked, Chicago would be like Mayberry. Guns are like parachutes, we may only need one once and if we do not have it we will never need it again.” Massachusetts licensing procurement is one of the most stringent in the United States. License application is sought at our local police station where we are scrutinized and profiled as to what we deserve a license for. Without criminal or mental history we qualify to be trained and carry a firearm. We pay for a training certificate and a one hundred-dollar license fee. If refused, we can request a hearing before the local court for judicial determination. Imagine, if we did this for 100mph vehicle operation or receiving habit-forming prescription narcotics?  The latter two, drugs and cars kill thousands every year. 

There are costs, often quite expensive for firearms, ammunition and licensing. The costs are discriminatory and unaffordable for many, only accessible to those having several hundred dollars.  The expense punishes the poor, yet in this instance it is deemed acceptable. The irony is poor people are more subject to crime because of the environment they live in.  When the costs of gun ownership rise that segment of society is very limited in their decisions. We are upset when they remain unlicensed and buy cheap illegal guns. Another social consequence of being poor, the government will never subsidize firearm ownership.

Is a firearm necessary?  So many profess it is not.  The epitome of safety is standing beside a police officer because he has a gun and is trained. There is not a more noble profession. The limitation of police is that they cannot be everywhere all the time and most of the time they are completely reactionary to events. They arrive in time to summon an ambulance, photograph the crime scene, or conduct the investigation.  The proactive side of police work is ever changing; whatever criminal opportunity exists, the unsavory will seek to take advantage. It can be devastating to be a victim and deprived of governmental protection, or any protection.  A firearm is not necessary for everyone but vital for many.

                                                                               

Society discourages firearm exposure for our children, while at the same time we increase the exposure to Marijuana, a gateway drug to further drug abuse.  Marijuana possession was one reason for restricting firearms’ licenses. By decriminalizing it, previously denied firearm ownership applicants could now be eligible. Will the people so restricted be applying for gun licenses? What a collateral effect, as we decriminalize drugs we make more drug-using citizens eligible for gun rights they were denied.

         

Mental health disclosure is a portion of firearms’ safety.  Liberalizing mental health disorder restrictions, not recognizing the danger to society has been disastrous. Labeling a disorder was not politically correct but it was a lot safer, a social consequence.

The left’s amnesty push for illegal aliens may ultimately backfire. The National Rifle Association is expecting a huge membership increase. More people granted citizenship and the "right to bear arms." Having been deprived of personal protection in their previous country, they will welcome their new constitutional right to bear arms. Adamant new gun owners may change the vote in ways we can only imagine.

Peter Risatti

THE PARADOX OF FREEDOM

The paradox of freedom, from the right. Have you read or heard the statement, “Fathom the Hypocrisy of a Government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured, but not everyone must prove they are citizens?” Our government has forced many of its citizens to exchange their health care, for a version of health care alleged to help the people that were uninsured. For compliance in Massachusetts our penalties or fines are levied on people filing income tax. We need to file income taxes in order to be fined for not having health care, as I understand it.

If we are working “Under-the-table” without tax consequences what difference does this make? It doesn’t. Without visible income we are considered indigent and entitled to all benefits afforded that classification. The taxpayer will fund their health expense. If the levied fine for uninsured is equal to, or less than the insurance premium is it functional? No. I’m healthy, but if I get sick I cannot be refused insurance for preexisting conditions. If I am young and healthy this certainly discourages me from getting insurance before I am sick. If private insurance companies cannot insure us normally then the coverage gained will have loaded deductibles. It will be handled under a pool of significant illnesses that go beyond simple disorders. There will be millions of healthy people that must insure to compensate for catastrophic conditions to balance what probably cannot be balanced.

It is improbable the government mandate of Affordable Health Care (AHC) can be delivered. Small businesses may have to discriminate in hiring based on health needs. Mandated insurance provided for everyone, including preexisting conditions, created a dilemma. Without a balance of premiums charged and patient needs compensated the insurance companies cannot prosper. There is little reason to be in business without profit. The previous health system in place was in need of restructuring. The results of the new AHC our freedom of choice is compromised . We assign government to pick up where insurance companies fail, subsidizing premiums. We place government in a precarious position. Is this why we have a Congress that is upside down, trying to deliver what it cannot? We provide an insurance to the majority that is marginal with sky rocketing co-payments and diminishing benefits for the people that pay premiums.

Freedom is a state of security for citizens to pursue happiness. This is not a difficult concept, we call it human rights, “Commonly understood as inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being.” Happiness should not be gained at the expense of another citizen’s physical pain or submission of property that is taken from them. In this case the pain is enduring loss of adequate healthcare removed by a government.

They started with thirty million residents not having health insurance. There were no estimates as to the number of non citizens. The health care provided was by way of hospital emergency room visits. The reasons for previously uninsured were unaffordable premiums, preexisting conditions, or plainly, insurance was not wanted. With recent subscriptions to affordable health care the emergency room visits by uninsured have not declined. Is anyone asking why?

We are asked to sacrifice a great deal so that process corruption can prosper. What part do our law makers play in this compliance? A great deal, if they collude with partisan groups that border on absurdity. They compromise the freedoms of the people that work and pay.

Somehow, our compassion for the needy has become a means for anyone of a needy mind set to exploit the system. If the government wants to expand coverage to non citizens and non taxpayers they need to establish and fund a clinical system to rival the hospital emergency room. Maybe a solution is in the original idea of clinics, the same as the Peace Corps does in foreign countries. They could actually help more foreigners right here in the United States? We would at least know how the money is spent. Now, we do not. Now, there is a thought for today!

Peter Risatti