What is to be reformed is the failure of those enterprises to serve the commonwealth. Since ancient times “commonwealth” (e.g. res publica in Cicero (from which the word “republic” is derived, by the way)) has been understood to mean the concern of the people or, in a word, government.

As for SCOTUS, they agree with me, they just don’t care.

Please convey your important pronouncement to the Supreme Cpurt of the United States. It appears they may not agree with your idea.

Health care in America IS business. Where do YOU live ?

( another tangential departure, seems to me . . .

Yes, I believe that we should believe things because the evidence shows them to be true.

This is a loaded statement. It seems sound on its face, and it no doubt works cleanly in simple situations, but is it universally applicable, especially for complex situations? I don’t think so. What is truth, after all? And how do you recognize it when you see it? What if something is true, but there’s also a bigger, better and different truth too?

This video is well worth watching: Class Day Lecture 2009: The Uniqueness of Humans. Its a general interest lecture (not offputtingly technical) by Sapolsky to a Stanford student assembly. Its about 38 minutes long. The payoff for my purposes here comes at around minute 34, so you can skip ahead if you’re in a rush. But, unless you’ve been keeping up with modern primateology and neuroscience, it might not make much sense without watching what came before. (there is an interesting but eminently skipable 5 minute introduction though)

I found the conclusion of the talk surprising and provocative.

And, since the issue is raised, our government is not a business, was not conceived of as a business, and can not work as a business. It is a major categorical error to confuse government with a business.

My comment quoted here was and is Issue Specific, ie,
what is missing from public knowledge in the HCR tumultuous controversy.

THAT IS THE PRIMARY PROBLEM THAT I SEE.

If someone was pushing on me a business proposal in this fashion
my prompt and immediate response would be: XXX

And at bottom this is all about $$$ (regardless of who are the beneficiaries)
and if that ain’t business, what is ?!

You see, you have just asked the primary question re this whole process, ie,
WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE ?

Yes, I believe that we should believe things because the evidence shows them to be true. Do you agree with that epistemology?

If you do, are you questioning my assertion that the evidence shows that most Americans like Medicare, and does it not follow that something rather mildly in that direction cannot therefore be a violation of American social values?

You see, you have just asked the primary question re this whole process, ie,
WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE ?

And fundamental to most of our problems the contri-bribe system of government.

I believe in attempting reforms, by degrees if necessay, but as rapidly as the need indicates and I know we will make better progress if there is no attempt to violate the societal values of the majority of Americans in the process; and on this latter, that is what I and most others understand is the essence of Democracy.

We will see . . .

The idea that it is THIS or all is lost I believe is fallacious.

Why fallacious? When do you think anyone is going to try again, if all the efforts of 2009 end up leaving those who try as empty-handed and politically wounded as those who tried SIXTEEN years ago. (And it was a long time before that.)

Most political analysts I’ve read DO believe, on the basis of such evidence, and a common sense understanding of the lessons that political leaders will draw from it, that it is THIS and it is NOW or it is nothing for a good long while.

And just as we are paying an enormous price –as a nation, as an economy, as families– for the failure of Clinton’s efforts, we will pay dearly if this present effort goes down in defeat, leaving us indeed with this status quo for years to come.