Organizing for America | Alexandra Woods's Blog

Community Blogs

Alexandra Woods's Blog

View Full Profile »

About The Author...

Alexandra (New York City, NY)

« Hide Full Profile

User Profile

User:

Name:

HEALTH CARE: ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL

By Alexandra - Dec 8th, 2008 at 1:31 pm EST

Also listed in: National GOTV Call Team | NY Call Team | Upper West Siders for Obama

Dear President Elect Obama,

Boy, it feels good to write that title!!!! To paraphrase Barney Frank, it will b great to have a President in office.

While I applaud your intent to reform health care, I am concerned that some of your initiatives are not fully thought out, and may be destructive to that increasingly small band of private practitioners who are running small businesses on their own, who have chosen to opt out of Managed Care networks, As you know managed care pays insultingly low fees to doctors. If more internists and GP's are forced out of business, guess who suffers most? Their patients.

I am referring to the requirement that all medical practitioners convert to electronic record keeping.

I am also referring to your past statements that you would not look at caps to medical liability.

My internist runs her own office in Manhattan. She is a small business provider, who provides high quality care, takes all the time that is necessary to work with her patients, always goes the extra mile in terms of calls, follow up, careful record keeping, and keeping herself up to date with current medical findings. In addition, she was at the forefront of the AIDS crisis, treating patients in NYC in the ealy 80's when they were being turned away, and humiliated in innumerable ways by most doctors and medical institutions.

My internist keeps her records on paper. She says that in order to maintain electronic records, a small office like hers, would have to pay $50,000 a year, AFTER the initial conversion costs. If required to shift to electronic recording, she would have to go out of business.

She, and other small practitioners, are willing to enter electronic information into their patients' databases, and to work with hospitals in terms of pooling necessary electronic data. They are not intransigent. They are looking at the bottom line of their survival.

I have gone to fully electronic managed care offices of doctors. Unnecessary prescriptions and unnecessary tests are the norm. In one, I reported I had congestion in my chest. Running on the clock, the doctor did not once pull out her stethoscope. Instead, she wrote me a prescription for a powerful medication, which I did not use. Instead, I returned to my internist, who did do a full medical exam, determined that I did not have severe bronchial problems, prescribed fluids and bedrest, and I recuperated just fine.

With another doctor, I reported tinitus after going to a loud concert. His medical intervention was fine, but he prescribed an MRI (to protect himself against medical liability), as a prerequisite for further appointments. As it seemed much more reasonable that the loud concert had caused the problem, not a brain tumor, I decided against the MRI. That was two years ago. my brain is working fine.

Doctors should carry malpractice, doctors do make mistakes, and occasionally doctors are negligent. However, the business of malpractice suits has run amok, and the costs of insurance are driving dedicated professionals out of the business, or into low risk professions that are lucrative, but do not serve the community. The fact that individuals can sue for gratuitous amounts, that essentially reflect what their lawyers can obtain, and that the money is there to be had, rather than the true nature of the injury, is destructive to patients and doctors alike.

We all like to have an enemy. But, the era of the fat cat doctor, has long since passed.

I hope that you and your team will approach health care issues in a complex and nuanced way.

Sincerely,

Alexandra Woods, PhD
Licensed Clinical Psychologist
Psychoanalyst
Addictions Specialist

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

Calling Ohio can win the election for Obama!!

By Alexandra - Oct 2nd, 2008 at 11:53 pm EDT

Hello,

I just participated in a half hour online training with the Obama campaign's Neighbor to Neighbor program. Briefly, this particular Neighbor to Neighbor initiative is focusing on the state of Ohio. The Obama people say that Senator Obama has 256 "likely" to "solid" electoral votes. With Ohio, which has 18 electoral votes, he gets the 274 he needs to win.

Ohio has recently instituted an early voting system which allows people to start voting as of yesterday, September 30th. People in Ohio can register to vote until October 6. There is a new system in this state called "One Stop Voting" which allows people to register AND to vote at the same time. With one stop voting, which is of course available to voters of all political persuasions, Ohio will no longer be notorious for 8 hour voting lines as occurred all across the state in 2004.

The superior organization of the Obama campaign in particular is posing a huge threat to the Republicans. They have have mounted three law suits against this new system, all of which have lost in the courts. The Republicans appealed. Their appeal was turned down

In 2004, Kerry lost Ohio to Bush by 118,601 votes. That equals a difference of 9 voters per precinct. As of last night hundreds of people (probably young people with strong backs...) conducted "sleep ins" in front of polling stations across the state, so that they could be the first to vote. If enough Ohioans register and vote in one step, and if enough already registered Ohioans vote early, the election could be won, technically, in a very short period of time, (barring disaster...I have to say that for superstitous reasons.)

You might want to check this Neighbor to Neighbor online program out, or pass the information on. There is a video on www.barackobama.com which explains how to do the Neighbor to Neighbor calling. It involves phoning people, from the warmth of your home or your office, who have been selected by the campaign. You can make as many or as few calls as you like. Then the task is to "canvass", which involves asking people a series of straightforward, scripted questions (with good room for improvisation) to get a sense of where they stand. You then enter your findings via a simple process online. The data is collected. After that, Obama canvassers in Ohio will contact the people who are leaning in his direction again.

I have participated in the face to face canvassing in PA twice, and will continue to do so. It is a fascinating, moving experience. The accuracy of the data collection process in even tiny campaign offices is remarkable. In PA, likely Obama voters are contacted FIVE TIMES in different ways all over the state. This is going on in every swing state across the country.

But right now the OHIO initiative is particularly exciting and vital, (and does not involve schlepping.)

Think about it!

Alexandra Woods

P.S.Send this great little video to people who may want to vote but don't know how fast they have to register! Get them to vote!
http://www.youtube.com/user/5friendsvote

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

Congratulations!! And we need your response to Burma

By Alexandra - May 7th, 2008 at 6:21 pm EDT

Congratulations,sir. You are getting closer and closer to the finish line in terms of securing the nomination, and you have survived alot to get here. I am ready for you to be our nominee.

We now desperately need your response to the crisis in Burma. Move On reports 100,000 dead. This is a key opportunity for you to speak to the international tragedy that this poses.

For once, George Bush and his wife are being proactive. Where is your voice on this????

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

What kind of country forces a man to repudiate his father

By Alexandra - May 1st, 2008 at 11:30 pm EDT

What kind of country do we live in that forces a man to repudiate his father in order to continue to run for President? What perverse rite of passage is this that we Americans have demanded of Senator Obama? A rite in which pundits cheer over disconnection, and caricature, and pontificate about "the right thing" without having listened to anything of substance that has been said by Senator Obama, by black religious leaders, and by Reverend Wright himself?
How many white people have bothered to listen to Reverand Wright's entire speech at the Press Club? Not just the Q and A where he had to answer excruciatingly difficult questions, that he could barely hear? How many white people have listened to his sermons rather than the endless YouTube soundbites?
How many people watched TV newscasters, not even commentators, opinionate so loudly and hysterically over the Q and A segment that one could barely hear the Reverand speak? Telling us what to think because they were so freaked out over what? That Reverand Wright made a joke that he could be VP? The Press Club is famous for humor. Why could he not have a moment of it without white people literally going crazy?
It reminded me of the psychotic racism that James Baldwin, Ralph Ellison, Toni Morrison, William Faulkner wrote of. Plugging in one's ears and refusing to listen to what is being said. Or worse, distorting, charicaturing and demeaning a man's words, and his right to speak.
Reverand Wright wasn't at that press club all alone. He was surrounded by people who were distraught at the mockery that was being made. He was there because black religious leaders all over the county have been shocked at how the black church, and he, and Senator Obama have been villified by the pundits, the press, and the (mostly white) public. Many of these leaders were upset that Senator Obama rejected Wright's words at the beginning of his first speech on race.

Senator Obama knew that only soundbites would be picked up from his speech, not the content, not the deep wisdom in his words. So he chose to distance himself from the Reverand in the first line of his talk. Then he went on to say what was truly important.
But guess what, it didn't matter that Senator Obama distanced himself from Reverand Wright in his first lines; it didn't matter that the Senator gave a magnificent speech on race, on connections between people, on the importance of staying together with one's family, of reaching out across differences. It didn't matter because no one in mainstream white America was going to listen. They were just going to play the rerums of the old YouTube snippets over and over again. I imagine that the Senator began to truly understand what it feels like not to be listened to, not to be granted the right to be heard.
And then Obama started losing his footing a bit. Making awkward remarks, and appearing subdued and distanced in a tremendously important debate. And people said, Oh he's lost his touch, he doesn't have it, blah, blah, blah. And I started to have my own doubts.
But now that I see what has happened since, I wonder if perhaps Senator Obama was in the process of wrestling with perhaps the most soul wrenching question of his life. Would he have to repudiate his own "father", the man who married him and Michele, the man who baptized his children, the man whose phrase, "The Audacity of Hope" became the title of his second book in order to continue his run for the Presidency? I imagine that he was being told that is what he would have to do.
What an unbearable, and tragic choice. And what a recreation of one of the most horrific legacies of our so called nation. Black families for generations have had to repudiate their fathers in order to get food stamps. Slaves had to give up on families, as they were torn apart and destroyed by rape and other untold forms of degradation. And now this man is being forced, so that he might have a chance to lead this country into some form of hope, to reject his tie to this man who mentored him, cared for him, and led one of the most extraordinarily dedicated churches in America.
And what is the value that is being touted? Be tough. Hillary would have gotten rid of someone who was a liability right away, say the pundits. Would she have had to turn on a mother who raised her, or a man who stood in for her father? I doubt it. The rules for white women in this country are tough, but they are not that tough, not that crazy.
We have become increasingly a country that thrives on disconnection, alienation, and distraction, cutting of ties, we live on two minute connections. But even worse our racist legacy lives on as vivid and psychotic and malevolent as it was in the 1930's and the 40's and the 50's and the 60's.
An acquaintance of mine who is black listened to me when I told him that an Egyptian friend found American preoccupation with our history of racism strange and foreign to her. Too binary. Too reductionistic. And Barack has been saying that too; he has wanted to transend these limits that strangle us all. My colleague said to me, "Just ask a dark skinned immigrant to this country how long they can stay apart from America's history of racism." I have not forgotten those words.
And I wonder how Senator Obama is feeling as he has made this impossible choice. If he retains hope, and connection to what is important, and if he is able to pass that wisdom on as the next President, it is because people have stood with him in his darkest hour, and borne witness.
Alexandra Woods
A white American

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (5) | Report Objectionable Content

Governor Richardson , Obama, and Obama's great leadership

By Alexandra - Mar 21st, 2008 at 4:37 pm EDT

Thank you Governor Richardson, I supported your presidential campaign, and was sad to see you drop out.

I want to thank you for your leadership and integrity, and for pushing crucial issues forward in the campaign.

Now I want to thank you for holding off on your endorsement of another candidate, despite considerable pressure that you faced along the way. Thank you for trusting that there would come a time when one of the candidates truly succeeded in proving themselves. I think that moment came when Senator Obama spoke so eloquently about race. And I am glad that you chose this moment to endorse him, and his courageous stance.

I am writing as someone who has been on the fence. I have given money both to Hillary's campaign, and to Barack's. I have felt troubled by the misogyny expressed toward her, and the racism expressed toward him, by people I know, and by public figures. I have also felt that each candidate had considerable strengths and real liabilities.

And I have felt that it is crucial to remember that we need a Democrat to show that s/he has the capacity and leadership ability to win the White House. This week I believe that Senator Obama demonstrated that capacity, in a way that was both unexpected, as most great moments are, and in a way that was necessary. He has shown us that he is able to communicate about tremendously painful, and divisive issues in a way that is wise, complex, and inclusive. We have needed to experience from him his ability, not his promise, to become the President of the United States, and a great one at that. And Senator Obama made that happen. I appreciate your making this moment more powerful by your public statement.

Regards,

Alexandra Woods

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

Why I'm voting for Barack: letter to 100 friends

By Alexandra - Feb 5th, 2008 at 10:22 am EST

Dear Friends, I am writing to encourage those of you who are eligible to vote in a Presidential Primary Election either tomorrow (Feb. 5th) or in the weeks that follow to strongly consider voting for Barack Obama. Rather than a standard endorsement, I will share a few personal ruminations on why I have decided to vote for Mr. Obama,. As a psychologist/analyst/environmentalist/writer, and also a person who tends towards idealism, and perhaps not enough pragmatism, I have worried that maybe I am just too swept up in the excitement around Barack Obama. Have I been losing sight of the crucial imperative for a national Democratic victory? This is a question we all have to address for ourselves. These are some of my thoughts. . I decided I needed a perspective from people who were not fellow psychoanalysts, organizers, or clear cut "progressives". I needed to talk, and will continue to talk, with to people whose professional fields were very different from mine. I decided to chat with some friends/colleagues who are Democrats or Independents, and who have senior positions the business world, specifically financial planning, investments, stocks and bonds,. I have also been talking with people in PR and publishing. Some endorsed Hillary Clinton. The two financial analysts I spoke to, both of whom I respect deeply, surprised me by telling me that each had been committed to the choice of Barack Obama for some time, something that they choose not to discuss with their clients. Both said that they felt strongly that Obama could win the Presidency against the Republican candidate, (most likely John McCain.). Both cited his integrity, his brilliance, his appeal to young people, and his proven capacity to find his way to the top. These observations meant a great deal to me. This leads me to my second rumination: on the topic of being tested. And also on the comparisons that are being made between JFK and Obama. (See Frank Rich in the New York Times and the 500+ responses...) These comparisons concern me. First, I would hope that we should do our best to look at Obama himself, and not to try to impose someone else's halo, or demerits, on him. There is a kind of idealization AND criticism that seems, to me, to miss the point. For example, JFK's shared brilliance, writing, capacity for articulating vision are resonant. But, they are very different men. Very little is being said about the differences in class, race, and privilege between the two. Many of the critiques are that President Kennedy was tested by war before he ran for President, and Obama was not. But what about the test, over a period of 40 years, that involved this man of mixed race, raised by a single parent, rising from relative poverty to national prominence and to a brilliant Presidential candidacy on the strength of his abilities alone? And, of course, that goes for Michele Obama too. President Kennedy, also brilliantly talented, grew up in a world of great privilege and wealth, and his candidacy was funded and orchestrated for him, by his father. JFK wrote Profiles in Courage. Obama's books, Dreams of My Father, and The Audacity of Hope are highly courageous syntheses of a tremendously complicated life, and represent an equally complex and sophisticated world view. Like all of us, I have been thinking hard about Senator Clinton. Were she to be elected the Democratic candidate, I would work for her. No question. But, while I respect Hillary Clinton, her experience, and the strength she has had to develop under years of fire, much of it undeserved, I am concerned about the role that she is allowing former President Clinton to play in her campaign. While his inappropriate remarks are nothing compared to the Swift Boat attacks that are sure to be fired off by the Republicans later in the campaign, the comments are still inappropriate, and are sanctioned by Senator Clinton. It is not enough to say that her spouse was overenthusiastic. She can't have it both ways. Yesterday, Bill Clinton was "watching the Super Bowl" with Bill Richardson, and hunting for his endorsement. What was he offering him or threatening to withhold? Who is running this campaign? Because of these questions, I am concerned about what could be a total of sixteen years of a Clinton administration. I do not agree with all of Obama's positions. I question his position on health care; I oppose his position on nuclear power (there is not enough uranium left to last ten years). But, Mrs. Clinton's more vague stance on nuclear power is not a better position. I do think her stance on health care is stronger. I am confident, however, that Obama is capable of working toward consensus, that he will lead/push/inspire us in the right direction, and that it will be our responsibility to push him. I think his world vision, and his ability to attract a great team, will enable him to engage in foreign policy from a footing that is strong and wise. Finally, I believe he has the integrity that has been so sorely missed in many years. To me this is essential.I hope you will seriously consider voting for Barack Obama in the primaries, and in the national election. If you are interested in learning more about Obama and his position on various issues, check out his website http://my.barackobama.com. Thanks for your interest. Best regards, Alexandra (Woods)212 362 8436

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

Letter to Bill Richardson: SuperBowl with Bill Clinton

By Alexandra - Feb 3rd, 2008 at 5:17 pm EST

I would like to state that, after supporting Richardson, I have moved to a position of strongly endorsing Barak Obama. This letter reflects my great concern about what the Clintons are doing to undermine his campaign, manipulate the voters, and to shamelessly play on racial divisions once again.

Alexandra

Dear Governor Richardson,

As your records will show, I contributed to your campaign early and on more than one occasion. I was a supporter of yours when few of my friends in New York barely were registering your candidacy.

I supported you because of your integrity,your great record as Governor, and your understanding of what I call "people issues": what it costs to live, what's happening in schools, what's happening to jobs in this country. I supported you because you are a Hispanic man, and I believed your voice was sorely needed. And I thought you were a pretty strong environmentalist, and coming from the South West, would get stronger.

But mostly I supported your principled, deeply felt, and brilliantly articulated rejection of the war in Iraq from the beginning.

Today I hear that Bill is watching the Super Bowl with you, and is gunning for your endorsement.

I have no power to influence you, no massive charisma, no promises to dangle before you (V.P?), no threats (I am sure those are there too from Bill. We know him.)

But what I will say, as one citizen, is that if you do endorse the Clintons, and Hillary who made the wrong vote on the war, and has been equivocal ever since, if your support the Clintons who have also played the race card on several occasions, I will feel deeply, deeply disappointed.

Voters are passionate, hopeful and knowledgeable, as never before. We are desperate for change, for openness, and for leadership with integrity. Please do not disappoint us.

I do believe that if you decide to let the voters make their own choices, instead of being manipulated into extremely difficult positions, that again pit groups of people against each other, you will find that your great abilities will find the expression that they deserve.

Sincerely,

Alexandra Woods

Mail to a Friend | Link | Comments (0) | Report Objectionable Content

Posts

Content on blogs in My.BarackObama represents the opinions of community members and in no way should be interpreted as endorsed or approved by the campaign.