• featured
  • featured
  • featured

 Powered by Max Banner Ads 

The War for Health Care Reform

By Mike O.
Friday, August 7th, 2009

Not long ago I wrote a blog entry here at Issue Oriented about how health care reform was about to become to a huge issue for the country. Though I was expecting an onslaught of misinformation and anger from the Right, I never thought things would develop quite like they have thus far.

First, a few facts about the issue: There is no “Obama plan”. Unlike the 1994-94 “Clinton health plan,” which famously turned Hillary Clinton into the caricature the Right loves to hate, President Obama made an early decision to leave the development of the plan’s specifics to Congress. Obama laid out what he wanted in health reform (a public plan, various new regulations on insurers, a new health care “exchange”, etc.), but rather than create a plan for which he would be directly accountable, he gave that responsibility to the House and Senate, many of whom are up for re-election next year. The result of that decision has been two separate bills that are different from each other in a number of ways – and a lot of back-and-forth on the financing and the reforms. The House plan is ready for a floor vote and (as of this blog) the Senate plan is still stuck in the Finance Committee.

On one side of this debate you have the opponents of health care reform. We have all seen them on tv and YouTube this past week, showing up at town hall meetings and turning discussions into rallies against reform. Though it is true that some of these folks are being turned out by the Republican establishment (conservative “tea party groups” and groups funded by insurance companies) most of the anger and fear being expressed at these town halls is genuine. Misinformation is being spread on talk radio, cable tv news shows and the internet; this bad info ranges from the ridiculous notion that the elderly will be forced to choose how to die, to the claim that liberty itself is at stake. Who wouldn’t be afraid of that if you didn’t know any better? With the government taking larger-than-usual steps to handle the financial and economic problems of the last year and getting little return, the public is offering a slimmer-than-usual margin of error on health care reform. Add in some horror stories about big government and “socialized medicine,” and you have a lot of genuine fear.

But just because something is genuine, doesn’t mean that it is legitimate. Let’s face it, health policy is very complicated and most people do not understand the basics of our health care system – not to mention the extent to which government is already involved in the system. This has been illustrated by a scenario which has played out at numerous town halls already – the senior citizen shouting that “the government needs to keep its hands off my Medicare.” (Medicare, of course, is a government insurance program that covers tens of millions of people.) For the members of Congress holding these town halls, it is a difficult challenge – how does one deal with a constituent who clearly does not understand the issue, but do so without coming off as an elitist?

The Republicans and conservative groups understand all this too well and are taking full advantage of it. And they are shameless in their spread of misinformation because the political stakes are so high. They know that if the Democrats win health care reform, it will be yet another nail in the Republican coffin. Though we Americans tend to pride ourselves on our “can do” spirit, deep down inside we want a safety net available for when we need it. Once it is provided, Washington dare not try to take it away. That is why even the most passionate conservative Republican in the House supports keeping Medicare in place – the seniors in their district would vote them out of office in a heartbeat if their Medicare was threatened, let alone taken away. When it comes to health care reform, the same principle holds true, and whichever party solves the health care crisis will enjoy decades of political dividends.

But this is not a war of ideas. The Republican solutions to health care are far out of the mainstream (i.e. weak insurance plans with $5,000+ deductibles and weak consumer protections), so the only thing they can do is drown out the debate with fear and anger, hoping to kill the bills. The same tactic worked for the Democrats and progressive groups back in 2005 when Bush proposed to turn part of Social Security over to Wall Street. The Dems did not have a solution to the Social Security solvency issue, so it made sense to focus on the risks Bush’s plan would create for retirees. Progressive groups – myself included at the time – ran town hall meetings, did district office visits with Congress members and organized press conferences to highlight the fears people had with the proposal. It was just a matter of time before Bush’s plan imploded. No alternative ideas were needed – all you need to do is rile people up, and organize them in a fashion that puts the proponents running for cover. It is a fairly simple concept that happens to work.

On the other side of the health care reform debate, there isn’t so much misinformation – but there is plenty of denial. President Obama is not calling for a Canadian-style single payer system – but he has called for a public plan that would compete with private insurers. Opponents of the public plan say that this is a trojan horse for single-payer -  and they’re correct. I worked for seven years for an organization that supports single-payer, and the public option was always understood to be a way to get your foot in the single payer door. This is supported by recent YouTube video clips of President Obama and Senator Barney Frank admitting that the public plan would eventually lead to the private insurers being forced out of the system and the evolution of a Medicare-style health insurance program that would take over. It is difficult if not impossible to honestly argue that you’re just looking for more “competition” by introducing a public plan in the face of video evidence like that, but yet that’s what the Dems are doing.

Given the failure of private insurance over the decades to make quality coverage affordable (nearly 15,000 people lose their insurance every day), I personally think that real reform cannot happen without a public option of some sort. Health care is so expensive that much of the private coverage is already subsidized in one way or another. Employer-sponsored health insurance would not exist if the government did not help employers by giving them a generous tax break for doing so. “Medicare Advantage” plans (which are private plans) could not offer benefits without relying on taxpayer dollars. Even Mitt Romney’s so-called “free market” health reform in Massachusetts feeds heavily from the public trough. The “free market” people demanding that the “government should stay out of health care” do not know what they are talking about. It is as simple as that.

At the same time, the conservative critics are correct about the state of Medicare funding – it is in horrible shape, and needs to be addressed. Democrats and progressives keep punting the ball because the answer is going to have to involve some combination of raising taxes and cutting benefits, and that is poison even in a non-election year. The Democrats’ hope is to deal with this issue in part by passing health care reform. Include some changes to Medicare and raise some taxes as part of the overall package, and the blowback is muffled by the gains.

Given how things are going, what is likely to happen is that either health care reform will die a very public death or the public option is going to be dropped from the final bill. It currently does not exist within the Senate bill, and it is so controversial in the House that, if it were put to a vote today, it wouldn’t pass. But even if the public option is dropped it would still be an uphill battle for Democrats and other proponents, as the misinformation campaign of the Right has branded everything and all things “health care reform” as poison. Reform may be damaged goods at this point; and if entertainers like that idiot Glen Beck could convince people that the House plan mandated euthanasia for the elderly, then they can convince them of just about anything. Until the bill is finally dead.

Tags: , , ,

Older Post
Newer Post

4 Responses to “The War for Health Care Reform”

  1. Jason Says:

    Hey Mike, thanks for providing such great insight to this issue. I’ve been hearing a lot about the Republican campaigns against public health care, and admit to being very skeptic of the democrats plans. I do know where medicare comes from though ;) .

    I have family in the UK, and while there are definitely advantages to the public system, there are setbacks too- such as not being able to get care when you need it, and long waiting lists.

    Regardless, the point you brought up is an important one – that political parties are taking advantage of public ignorance of the system and instilling fear for personal advantage. This reminds me of a great book “The Culture of Fear” by Barry Glassner which brings to light a lot of public fear mongering.

    Thanks for the great article!

  2. Mike via Facebook Says:

    Very fair article, but…Who pays? There’s only three ways to pay for social services: raise taxes, increase the debt, or cut/ration benefits. Please excuse the outlying crazies that show up at the Tea Parties and town hall meetings. However, I think the general theme of the more sane and organizers is: how are we to pay for this? I don’t think that is a crazy right wing question.

    1) Health insurance needs to be just that, insurance. $5k deductible for catastrophic incidents (or a lower deductable if you want to pay)…like any other insurance you carry (home, car, etc) and a tax-free HSA for any other medical (we already have this).

    2) Doctors and health facilities need to post their costs and people need to realize that quality care cost quality dollars. Why can someone pay $150 for a tune-up, but not $150 for an annual visit. Which is more important? You car or your life?

    3) End of life. May sound harsh, but if you want to live your last 3 vegetative months at a cost of $1M, you better have that cash squirreled away. Otherwise, I’m sorry, but society cannot pay for this burden. Personally I believe DNR is mercy. If you don’t think so, I suggest you watch a Code Blue team at work on someone who is destined to die. Watch them pound on a lifeless form for 45 minutes. My sister did her residency in geriatric care and saw just that. And we both sat with our mom when she signed the DNR papers for our father. After talking to my sister about her experiences, I am confident we made the right decision for my dad.

    4) Drugs. I don’t have any answer for this. Working in the drug industry, I know that drugs costs a lot of money. There is no greedy devil reaping rewards. There is years of R&D. There is a multi-phased FDA approval process that takes decades. The lowered cost negotiated by Canada and other countries is at the expense of the U.S. consumer. We are basically subsidizing all of the socialized medicine countries that pay reduced drug prices. Could I be wrong about this? sure. Honestly, I have the most information here, but also the most doubts. There is an immense drug lobby in DC and I am pretty skeptical. Still, just like the best 62″ Plasma TV, the best drug is going to be expensive.

  3. mike o Says:

    Mike via FB,

    I agree with you on #3 and 4. End of life care is the most expensive. Unfortunately, there is no way in our political environment to have an honest discussion about this without it turning into a dishonorable yelling match about euthanasia and government control. It is easy too easy to scare people that way, and that means that the issue will likely go unresolved.

    I agree with you on Rx. But there have been some interesting studies on how rx drug patents that are too lengthy actually stifle innovation, which as I’m sure you know, is one of the industry’s main arguments against shorter patent periods and generic drugs. I’m also glad to hear you say that the American consumer is effectively subsidizing low rx drug costs in other countries. It is amazing how few people make that connection. But with over 500 lobbyists in DC, the Rx industry is effective in controlling the messaging.

    The high deductible plans and HSAs can work for the young and healthy, but they’re not the answer for the 50-64 age range. That is when most individuals (as opposed to families) start developing health problems and start needing real health insurance coverage. And that is a huge argument for health care reform because 50-64 is the fastest growing demographic among the uninsured. Shotty health plans and big deductibles aren’t useful for them, nor are they useful for younger people with chronic conditions.

    On the same note, I think that the conservatives make a huge error by thinking that health care is just another free market commodity. It isn’t. No one is going to go shopping for a “cheap” surgeon when they need a procedure, and no parent wants to contemplate finding a balance between their child’s health and the costs. Like you said, what is your health worth? It is priceless. “Consumer driven” health care is just cost-shifting- the insurance industry can’t afford the high costs of health care and are looking to consumers to shoulder more of the costs. The loser in that scenario is the consumer/patient.

    On a different note, another related issue that I did not touch on in my article is medical liability insurance reform. The Dems took this off the table immediately for obvious reasons (trial lawyers being one of their top donors). Insurers have been fine with that because many of them are milking doctors now with HUGE annual premiums on these policies. A balance needs to be found between curbing frivolous lawsuits and excessive medical liability insurance costs while maintaining an acceptable level of legal leverage and consumer protection for patients when they are done wrong. It is a shame that is not being addressed as a part of this debate.

  4. aaron m. Says:

    mike,

    it’s shit like this that makes me proud to be a burnt by the sun fan.

    love,
    aaron

Leave a Reply


 Powered by Max Banner Ads 
This text will be replaced

Subscribe

The podcast:
iTunes iTunes Enhanced
RSS Audio Add to My Yahoo Add to Google
IO Video:
RSS Video YouTube

Get new episodes in your inbox!

Latest Tweets

Reader Reaction

joey: "i guess im already on this list. i dont get any news or new issues or swag or love. what..."

Neal Conner: "It’s no suppose give direction. Punk rock never offers answers, It focuses..."

Tara: "@ Ahfadothodoteeu So true! Bands like Dillinger don’t get the recognition they..."

Recent Photos

BRIAN FAIR (SHADOWS FALL) on ISSUE ORIENTED
JUSTIN BRANNAN on Issue Oriented
JOE STEINHARDT on Issue Oriented
COBRA SKULLS on Issue Oriented
THE KOMINAS on Issue Oriented
DAVID MOORE on Issue Oriented
book @ Hopeless