Interestingly, as the "campaign" progresses, the debate has seemed to focus on energy policy (with Paris Hilton weighing in with the most sensible plan, but Obama a close second ;-) ), with the "war" in Iraq still a major issue and health care seemingly pushed to the back burner for the time being.

John McCain seems to feel that all of our ills can be cured by domestic drilling. I don't quite know how much this cures any ills, when oil companies are reporting record profits and most of the "expert" commentary seems to point to the high price as being a supply vs demand issue, not simply a supply issue. In other words, if our demand remains high, won't prices remain high? Especially if the oil companies are getting what they want, ie, record profits?

If I recall correctly, one of the reasons for capping a bunch of existing oil wells was that it would cost too much to bring that oil out of the ground (given the price of labor and such in the US). Are these wells uncapped and producing oil? I don't think they are in southern Illinois. Maybe the companies that own the land and leases are basically belly up by now (how could they not be?) but wouldn't it be cheaper to access this stuff? I wish I knew more about the subject.

And increasing the supply in the short term is a fix, but only FOR the short term. At some point America has to wean itself from the overuse of fossil fuels, and now would seem to be as good a time as any. Conservation initiatives and alternative fuel sources, including nuclear power, should be at the front of the debate, as they are in Obama's campaign.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch's hospital, health care is still a problem. How do we solve it? Are tax incentives and high deductible policies which attempt to promote consumer awareness in an effort to get people "comparison shopping" for their health care like they would a car or a new TV THE answer? Are they PART of the answer? (I'd like to think that yes, they need to be part of the answer.) Is managed care part of the answer? (I'd like to hope that it isn't. Insurance companies don't really care about the cost of medical care, they care about their bottom line, and they don't really care if managing their bottom lines makes the field of medicine even less attractive than it is today.) Single payer system? Maybe, if the reimbursement rates are satisfactory. Etc, etc.

The solutions to the problems with health care in the US are way more complicated than the solutions to the energy "crisis" (which really isn't a crisis at all, but is OPEC members and big oil companies taking advantage of us drivers and getting every last penny out of us with no concern what their actions are doing to our economy). Which is probably why they're avoiding the discussion of it. I doubt that the next president and Congress will be able to come to a consensus on a solution. I'm not sure there IS a solution, unlike the energy crisis, where technology can provide us with alternatives to our oil dependence.