During the past few Democratic Party debates several issues have been raised that have brought concern to my mind.  I’m sure that among the three candidates there are policy issues.  Of course, I’m still wondering where Dennis Kucinich is, but that isn’t my focus right now.

Barack Obama has recently come under attack by Hillary Clinton for his work with a law firm that represented a slum landlord.  I’m certain as a young associate Obama had little say in the clients he worked with.  That’s the nature of law firms.  The partners make the decisions and the associates do the work for the most part. 

But, according to recent ABC reports Tony Rezko has a deeper link to Obama than the candidate claimed.  Tony Rezko, the slumlord under federal investigation, was apparently approached by Barack right after Obama was elected to the Senate.  The Obama family was trying to purchase a home.  The seller was willing to sell the house and an adjacent lot.  Obama bought the house and Mrs. Rezko, Tony’s wife, purchased the adjacent lot to permit the deal to go through.  The transaction definitely gives the appearance of something being rotton in the Chicago neighborhood. 

Secondly, there is Barack’s not so universal “universal” health care plan.  Although he continues to claim that his plan covers everyone, it seems that there would be some 15 million citizens left without coverage.  Making health care affordable sounds good.  I’m sure lowering premium prices would help many of the families in America.  But, what about those who can’t afford to pay, no matter how low the premiums go?  There are 15 million who couldn’t afford to pay.  Barack insists that his plan is universal, but it is time for him to explain his definition of universal. 

The third issue that needs a closer look is his vote for the banks and credit card companies.  He voted against setting a 30% cap on the interest a credit card company can charge.  His explanation is that he thought 30% was too high.  We agree.  But, a 30% interest cap is better than no cap at all.  In essence, allowing the credit card companies the freedom to charge whatever they will isn’t a “no” vote. 

Listening to his explanation was troubling.  It’s as if he really didn’t understand the vote.  I agree that 30% is too high, but left unchecked as Obama voted isn’t going to help anyone… except the banks and credit card companies.  My dilemna is whether Obama has a lack of understanding of the issue or whether he actually wanted to give the banks a reprieve.  His vote lends itself to the latter.

Of the front three candidates, I’m sure there are issues that will continue to surface.  I’m sure none are skeleton free.  But, these Obama issues deserve and require a closer look.