Ron Dellums Quotes

There is a self interest in voting for a society where there is health care for all, where there's a mental health service for all, where there is education service for all.

I believe in taxation and health care that is outside the usual libertarian mandate, because I don't want people to have to suffer. It's as simple as that.

Technology can be a great equalizer when it comes to health care, education - to the point where rich, poor, middle class can all get the same benefits.

Education for all seems to be the product of a type of distributive justice that is in no way related to the individual.

Government has a role as well in what is referred to as redistributive justice.

Government becomes a burden only when it functions on behalf of the poor.

The government ought to be in the business of delivering health, education, housing, and basic services to people without a lot of game playing. There ought to be comprehensive childcare, a comprehensive approach to housing, a sane, rational way to finance education. But I also strongly believe in the notion of fundamental individual freedom.

I'm opposed to any policy that would deny in our country any human being from access to public safety, public education, or public health, period.

Government can't do everything, but there is a role for government and smart policy, especially in equalizing opportunities for folks.

Society and Government should together give priority to the poorest of poor and make efforts to provide affordable health services.

If Charlton Heston can have a constitutional right carry a rifle, why can't grandma have a constitutional right to health care?

Health insurance should be a given for every citizen.

Education, housing and hospitals are the most important things for society.

Any health care funding plan that is just, equitable, civilized and humane must - must - redistribute wealth from the richer among us to the poorer and the less fortunate. Excellent healthcare is by definition re-distributional.

If we cannot provide excellent educational opportunities to all children, safe communities, quality health coverage, or robust and fair avenues towards wealth creation, then our nation will increasingly be in peril.

There is just no reason why the richest nation in the world can't provide health care to all its people.

But what sets Europe apart is we insist on a social model that consists of solidarity, equal opportunity and a certain amount of redistribution.

I cherish the creation of public space and services, especially health, housing and the comprehensive education system which dared to give so many of us ideas 'above our station.'

The decision is 'trust fund' versus 'no more Medicaid' - and that shouldn't be a tough decision.

Strong advocacy for education, health care and worker safety will be indispensable if they are to get their fair share of President Bush's austere budget for the next fiscal year.

It is inexcusable that the richest country in the world does not take care of all of its people. We don't consider ourselves idealistic; we're thoughtfully trying to make a beautiful health care model.

Remember our proud history of social justice, universal health care, public pensions and making sure no one is left behind. Let's continue to move forward.

I happen to agree with many of the liberal emphasis on compassion, justice and equality. I just disagree that it's the government's role to provide everything.

Government has a responsibility to the have-nots.

If the government didn't try to guarantee that everybody should have access to decent health care, it wouldn't happen.