SOME OBSERVATIONS ON THE POLICE DEBATE

I found the public meeting on Monday evening involving the future of the East Washington police force to be a fascinating display of town hall democracy in action, with a rousing debate on both sides of the issue.  The citizens who attended on this blustery night were overwhelmingly in favor of maintaining the police force.  The mayor and several council members supported the citizenry.  Other council members believed that a study recommending the outsourcing of the police function to the City of Washington deserved consideration.

The discussion centered on the tradeoff between keeping a more visible police presence that is manned by part time, underpaid police officers with minimal supervision versus replacing it with a less visible police presence manned by a full time, better paid and better equipped police force. While I really do not have a dog in this fight, and see merits to both positions, I came away from the meeting with several thoughts I would like to share. 

First, I think it is important to remember that the part time, underpaid and less supervised model is arguably what led to the serious problems which necessitated the study in the first place. Changes are clearly in order to avoid similar occurrences.  These changes could certainly include keeping the police department in place.  One need look no further than Pittsburgh for an example of a large police department with inadequate accountability.  Size alone is not the issue.

 Unfortunately while there was discussion and individual testimonials, at the meeting, to support the premise that “more boots on the ground” on East Washington’s streets have lowered the crime rate compared to comparable communities that have outsourced this function, no data was presented to validate this view.  It would also be helpful to know how many Pennsylvania communities, similar to East Washington, maintain their own police departments.

Second is the notion that East Washington would lose its identity if it no longer has a dedicated police department.  In my experience this is not a foregone conclusion.  I have lived in Blackridge, in eastern Allegheny County which takes great pride in not being Churchill, Penn Hills and certainly not Wilkinsburg (even though the area is made up of all three).  Blackridge maintains its identity through a thriving Civic Association which holds activities all year long to build a sense of community.

 Another example is Buena Vista, a community in Elizabeth Township, Allegheny County.  The residents here keep their separate identity and are not known as residents from Elizabeth and certainly not from McKeesport.  Neither of these communities, nor many others across the State, sacrifice their uniqueness in the absence of a dedicated police force.

With our without a police department, municipal services will continue to get more expensive over time.  If East Washington is compelled to hire full time police officers in order to address administrative shortfalls and problems from the past, then salary, pension and medical insurance costs will grow quickly and consume more of the budget.

I believe that in the near future, increased municipal cost sharing between all Pennsylvania counties and their urban centers and between cities and their smaller neighbors will be unavoidable.  For the present, East Washington should carefully consider the options in balancing cost, efficiency and safety.  Monday’s meeting was a transparent step in that direction.

 

 

 

WHY BUY INSURANCE YOU DON’T NEED?

How do you convince young people to buy medical insurance that they do not need?  Aside from a faulty roll out of the automated system, this appears to be the conundrum of health care reform.  Young adults are not enthusiastic to save universal health care which offers no immediate advantage, when the powers that be are doing nothing to save them. 

The truth is that baby boomers entering retirement have already left their children an economy that cannot provide meaningful employment and saddled them with national debt beyond comprehension.  Now young people are being asked to be the first in line to prop up the health care system for the benefit of older and poorer Americans.  It seems like a case of adding insult to injury.

I believe there is a realistic solution to this dilemma that will quickly convince our young healthy citizens to buy into and come to embrace this needed reform.  My view is that young people do not object to the goals of universal health care, they object to the perception of unequal sacrifice and cost sharing. We need to demonstrate that progressive social and economic advances work both ways.  We must develop new programs to relieve young Americans of their educational loans, make it easier to obtain a first mortgage and subsidize jobs programs with additional training for the new economy.  In the health care area, offer young adults subsidized memberships to health clubs and wellness centers as an immediate benefit for their participation in the Affordable Care Act.  

 Lastly, we must raise taxes on older Americans so that boomers are part of the solution.  In short, make our young adults relevant again as the economy springs back to life.  Make it clear that we are all in this experiment of democratic socialism together.

 Once it is established that the goal is to help prepare young Americans for their generation to take over and not simply to drain them of resources to support their elders, the cost of universal health care will not seem so oppressive.  Looking backward, a few years from now, every young person will know someone who got sick unexpectedly and was helped by the insurance.  Eventually the young will get older and realize that to perpetuate lower cost medical care they need their children to participate in the program.  Healthcare reform will be viewed in the same vein as other entitlement programs, like social security.

In this age of social media our young people understand the concept that the more people that participate in an activity, the better the outcome.  Think of Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.  This culture of social inclusion and expansion must be exploited in explaining universal healthcare to our young.  After all, it was Steve Jobs and other tech entrepreneurs who convinced so many young Americans to buy products and services that they really did not need and changed the world.  In a short time our youth could not live without their smart phones and social networking.

The same result is possible with health insurance. Young adults will come to appreciate regular medical checkups and targeted programs to keep them healthy.  All Americans will be better off at a lower cost as a result.