PD Editorial: Town talk

<p>Reps. Lynn Woolsey and Mike Thompson say they don’t plan to host any town hall meetings, the kind many lawmakers and the president have been holding around the nation to get feedback on health care reform.</p><p>Too bad. North Coast residents have a lot to say about the matter.</p><p>We learned this first-hand Tuesday when we held our own live, online discussion. More than 200 people participated, and nearly 600 comments were posted over a two-hour span. (You can read the discussion thread at pressdemocrat.com.)</p><p>We don’t begin to compare this to the kind of discussion that congressional representatives could generate. After all, we don’t have a vote on Capitol Hill.</p><p>Nevertheless, many participants thanked us for hosting this town hall-like discussion and a couple encouraged us to send a transcript to our congressional representatives, which we plan to do.</p><p>It should be noted that both Woolsey and Thompson have held public meetings on health care via telephone, which is a limited form of community interaction. During Woolsey’s hour-long teleconference, for example, she heard from, and responded to, fewer than 20 people.</p><p>It’s true that some of the public meetings around the nation have been disrupted by speakers more interested in shedding heat than light. But it’s also true that many have not.</p><p>And it’s true that congressional hearings and town hall meetings have been so overly scripted in the past as to leave any honest public input to the end when most attendees are checking their watches.</p><p>Health care reform is a subject that generates intense and, by and large, well-informed public commentary. The public doesn’t need to hear from experts. They want the experts, the lawmakers in this case, to hear from them.</p><p>Given that, it wouldn’t hurt our congressional representatives to live on the edge a little, plan a town hall meeting and hear what North Bay residents have to say. Here’s a sampling of what we heard Tuesday:</p><p>“First of all, the status quo is definitely more expensive (than reform,)” wrote Nick Anton. “A public option is absolutely necessary .<TH>.<TH>. The argument that preventative care is more expensive and doesn’t save money is based on the fact that true preventative care from pregnancy to death has never been tried in this country.”</p><p>“Fundamental health care reform is a must but only when we have a viable and active economy that is capable of sustaining and supporting the $1 trillion investment that is required,” wrote Jim Jenkins.</p><p>“Rationing is a real issue for seniors,” wrote Kurt Hahn. “When most bills include a $220 billion cut in Medicaid for extended care (convalescent hospitals, board and care, etc.), home health care and rehabilitative care, how can any senior view it as anything except health care rationing?”</p><p>“If Canada’s system is so awful, why aren’t Canadians demanding our system?” one participant wrote. “Why is no one in Congress talking about the low-hanging fruit of tort reform?” wrote another.</p><p>Given the changing dynamics of this debate, it’s more important than ever that Woolsey and Thompson keep the channels of communication open.</p><p>Let’s start with a real town hall meeting. The public deserves to be heard, especially given the stakes involved.</p>