"Boy, your winters are really dreary here," my husband observed today as he looked out at the rain. "And it's only September." He is right. South Dakota has much drearier weather than a Californian is accustomed to. Here, we lack citrus trees and palms and we cannot take a day trip to the ocean side. And yet, in many ways, South Dakota is much less dreary than California.
California is now bankrupt. The state is issuing IOUs to many of its creditors and employees. But according to The Wall Street Journal many banks will no longer accept them. Foreclosures are common, but still, many cannot afford to buy suitable homes. And while many flocked to California during the great depression, hoping it was a land of opportunity, now many are emigrating from the state (NBC Bay Area).
It's not hard to see why. The cost of living is high and so is the unemployment rate. More people are leaving than are coming. And no other state lost as many residents. According to NBC Bay Area, California may lose a seat in congress for the first time in history. The state lost over 100,000 jobs last year, and this year, layoffs will continue.
One of the programs California overspent on was its Heathcare system. California has "public options" for its less wealthy citizens. The poorest residents qualify for Medi-cal, so do certain people with pre-existing conditions like pregnancy. Those who make too much money to qualify for Medical can put their children on the Healthy Families program, where parents can pay premiums of $18 a month for insurance subsidized by taxpayers. This sounds wonderful – and it is, until you realize that these programs are neither cheap nor free. Now, it's true that not all of California's economic woes were caused by its healthcare programs. The state also spent, as Bobby Darin sings in his rendition of Mac the Knife, "like a sailor". Its residents voted "yes" on nearly every bond measure. But the Obama administration also seems ready to spend liberally.
So I can't help but wonder – can the nation afford the public option? California went bankrupt as it attempted to support such an option for just its poorest groups. If we provide such an option, not only for the poor, but also for the rich, what kind of a burden will we really be bearing?
Still, right now, it looks like South Dakota's future looks sunnier (even if fall is approaching) and I am happy to be back.
Comments