So the prez is in town today to campaign for health care reform and continue to press Congress for an "up-or-down" vote by mid-March. His appearance here has been seen by some as an attempt to sway a couple of Ohio and Pennsylvania congressional reps who are on the fence.

Can you blame them? They read the polls. They saw what happened in Massachusetts. They know that this is an issue opposed by many, if not most, Americans.

Speculation abounds as to whether President Obama will be joined by Natoma Canfield, the self-employed Medina house cleaner whose premiums have been jacked up unmercifully by Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield. Her letter to the president drew a personal response; it would make great sense for the administration to have her play a part.

Here's the thing: Most people agree that something must be done to stop the runaway costs of health care, especially in a system that by most measures isn't that much more effective than other countries with nationalized systems.

I speak often to business owners who complain — rightly — about their skyrocketing premiums, but some of those same folks are cranky about what they call the administration's attempts to "socialize" medicine.

The system is out of control, and there is responsibility plenty to spread among insurers, lawyers, doctors, hospitals and government. It's hard to believe that we don't have a broader consensus for change.

But I agree with Rep. Tim Ryan, the Younsgtown-area Democrat, who despite being perplexed by Americans' reluctance to change health care, said that if it's not possible to muster the votes, then Congress needs to turn its attention to creating jobs.

Last week, I wrote that Lakewood Mayor Ed Fitzgerald seemed to be issuing a press release for little reason in calling on the city-county port authority board to apply for stimulus funds. The mayor, who is a candidate for the new county executive's job, took issue and called me to discuss.

He believes that there are indeed opportunities remaining for the board to apply for stimulus dollars (you'll recall that in the first wave, our port received none).

But more importantly, he argues that the port authority seems to have no ongoing strategy for developing congressional alliances and continuing to work the federal government for funds. "The port needs someone who can handle these issues for them in a systemic and methodical way," he says. "With funding opportunities appearing and disappearing quickly, they really can't wait to sort out all their internal staff issues."

Mayor Fitzgerald says that if the port staff couldn't get that done, then the board should have spent their money on a government relations firm to help them do it "for less than the money they paid for a public relations firm to advise them on how to handle (former director Adam) Wasserman's departure, and it could have paid real dividends."

It's hard to argue his logic.

Subscribe          Print          E-mail