- BIG NEWS:
- Health Care
- |
- Karl Rove
- |
- Iraq
- |
- Bill Clinton
- |
 |
||
Health-care reform was the single biggest issue in the 2008 campaign. Everywhere any of the candidates went, especially town hall meetings, they were peppered with the question: "What are you going to do about the dismal state of our nation's health care system?" There weren't any 'Tea Baggers' descending on these places demanding the candidates pledge that they do nothing to change the miserable private health care system we currently have. Even John McCain and Sarah Palin had to pretend they had a plan and talked up all sorts of nice sounding "reforms," such as shopping for insurance across state lines, that would do little (if anything) to stop the insurance and pharmaceutical corporations from gaming the system. What happened that so changed the terms of the health care debate?
Adam Smith, in The Wealth of Nations, refers to capitalist business elites as "an order of men whose interest is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even to oppress the public, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it."
The same type of business people Smith identified 233 years ago run our political economy today. For them the system works best when elites make the most fundamental decisions for our society, unencumbered by the trappings of "democracy", and when the population is depoliticized, misinformed, or both.
Single payer? "Off the table."
Tax the windfall profits of health insurance and drug companies? "Off the table."
Volume buy drugs to control costs? "Off the table."
Public Option? (We'll see).
The elites have spoken.
Forty years ago, the social theorist Paul Baran pointed out that contemporary capitalism's emphasis on marketing and advertising is designed "to make people want what they don't need, and not to want what they do." It's painfully obvious that we need a national health care system that provides every American with access to affordable, quality care. But with the "Running of the Tea Baggers" this August we see the power of elites to "deceive and oppress" the public, and to confuse people about what's in their best interest.
Even in times of peace and prosperity the corporate media environment produces false needs and uses corporate marketing techniques to manipulate consumers. This media environment also knows how to push all the right buttons that dwell in the hearts of "low information" citizens to allow elites to dictate national policy and to block reforms that will cut into their bottom line.
The corporate-tool-Congressman-from-Louisiana-turned-corporate-tool-lobbyist-for-Big Pharma, Billy Tauzin, cut a deal with the White House so his clients, who have gorged themselves at the public trough, cannot be charged more than the arbitrary amount of $80 billion over a ten year period because that just wouldn't be fair. And this calculation comes after George W. Bush, Thomas Scully and Tauzin himself engineered a huge giveaway of taxpayer dollars to the pharmaceutical industry with the passage of the 2003 Medicare prescription drug bill.
Tom DeLay rammed it through Congress while the Bush White House lied about its true costs. Lying to Congress about the costs of a major overhaul of the nation's Medicare system might sound like an impeachable offense to some of us, but in the halcyon days when the Republicans controlled everything and had the corporate media cheerleading for them we heard nary a peep of criticism. Tauzin, Scully, and their buddies instantly became fabulously wealthy -- who wouldn't want to rake in over $2 million a year as a shill for Big Pharma?
The current state of the health care "debate" illustrates, even with the election of Barack Obama and large Democratic majorities in Congress, we might have already lost the vocabulary for collective moral discourse. Whenever someone says health care is a human right or that the federal government is capable of managing a large part of the nation's health care system (as it already does) these ideas are generally met with scorn, indifference, and an onslaught of lies.
Follow Joseph A. Palermo on Twitter: www.twitter.com/N/A
Tom Ridge: I Was Pressured To Raise Terror Alert To Help Bush Win
Roger Ebert's Journal: Archives
Organizing for America | BarackObama.com | Health Care Forum with the Presiden...
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Almost every AP article I read reports of large numbers of angry voters heaping scorn on HR 3200 (the House health care reform bill) @ Democratic town halls; I haven't read ONE article about angry pro-reform voters @ Republican town halls. In fact I read one article where anti-reformers outnumbered pro-reformers 10 to 1. Where are the angry pro-reformers?!? I think we misguessed this one- the majority of voters simply are not on board w/ Democrats plans for health care reform; I am 100% behind the reform efforts as they are, but see the writing on the wall.
The economy was the key issue not health care!
Sorry, the truth is........
Most of you didn't know there was an economy problem until Sept. or Oct.
Americans don't pay attention until they are told what to do and say.
We voted for Healthcare Reform.
That was the platform of every debate and Barack had the answer We wanted.
Just because the yell and scream and have no self respect...
Maybe if they all knew what Healthcare Reform was....
Oh that's right...It
No, it wasn't.
Try not to be wrong, constantly, Professor.
Health Care was the key issue until the economy tanked. Then the economy was the key issue. Some of the reactionary positions in the news, and also that I see around me, has undertones of fear of taking on the Health Care changes at this time; fear of adding even more burden to the economy and to the federal deficit. Also the fear that Health Care is dissipating the energy and focus required to address the regulatory wasteland that let (and is still letting) financial institutions ruin the economy.
Many of us on the left know we need to extend health care to those who do not have it. It turns out the 85% or so of Americans who have health insurance are fairly satisfied with it, so Obama has to tailor his pitch to them. He must continue to describe how with a layoff or job lose any of us can lose our health insurance. How the fear of losing health insurance keeps people in jobs, although they would like to try something new with their lives. How many who get insurance as individuals and not through a group plan are vulnerable their coverage will be denied with a major injury or illness.
It is hard for Obama to educate the public and counter the crazy rhetoric about death panels from the far right Fox News, Rush Limbaugh crowd. I thought much of the noise machine would fade to the background with the election of Obama, but they are screaming "socialism" and "Nazi" louder than ever. If Obama gets a bill through it will be a victory, but may not result in much cost savings with all the giveaways. In the future, we can take the plan in a more progressive direction.
This is following the pattern of every other major issue of the last two decade----
Republicans set the stage, write the script, own the language, excite their standard actors, curse all who disagree while invoking their religion and create the drama that media eats up and regurgitates ad infinitum.
Democrats develop policy, discuss options, argue over details, condemn our own who aren't true enough to our goals, own the high ground, express disgust with the crassness of the other side, can't believe how anyone with any sense could take them seriously and wait for the truth to overcome.
Guess who wins---again.
Yes, it is the same script over and over again. Unfortunately, in America crazy shrill rhetoric about government death panels trumps sound, sane policy discussion. Often we do not seem much different than the crowd in Afghanistan who wanted to keep out modernity. Many on the right appeal to our primitive nature time and time again and it works.
There is noting new about all this. I picked up Noam Chomsky's little book titled "Media Control" for a reread. It was copyrighted in 1991! He describes exactly what's happening now. Funny how things never seem to change!
Great commments, thank you all, thoughtful, and helpful.
I'm beginning to sour on Obama. This guy came into the presidency with the momentum of a freight train. Had it been me, I would have used it to pass public funding for all federal campaigns. It would have been the first thing on my to-do list. That would have made everything else so much simpler. Besides, nothing ticks me off more than sending someone to congress to represent me and having him or her bought by some special interest before they even cast their first vote.
I don't need health care reform. I'm on Medicare and my pension plan pays my Kaiser Permanente premiums. Nonetheless, I believe that my community does need it and I’m willing to work for it.
In the interest of avoiding total destruction of the private insurance industries, Obama’s health insurance plan is complex, slow to develop, and open to criticism, justified or not. I see this as another mistake Obama and our congress are making. I would have simply extended Medicare to everyone. It could have been done almost overnight. Medicare has been demonstrated to work well, it’s well known to the American public, and a great number of our citizens have it, like it, and will vouch for it. It’s a no-brainer.
It just might serve us better to stand back and catch our breath and re-think what we’re doing. The private health insurers are probably not worth saving.
Don't give up on it him yet - he needs support from the Left because the Right is blistering him --his Town Hall yesterday was brilliant and I believe he's committed to the public option. Stay tuned. It's still very early in his presidency.
Joseph, I hope you're right! If anyone can do this, he can.
There is a factor in this discussion that you will never hear
mentioned, in the MSM, but I'll couch it here.
There is @n 'element', of these people, who will not st0p.
The idea that the c0untry has a bl@ck President is s0 repugn@nt to them,
that if someone told them th@t by ki))ing their own mother,
they "could get THEIR c0untry back",
they would not just c0nsider it,...they would do it!
1 of 2
Whether it should be done by Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Hoyer, or some other high ranking Democrat, a very emphatic and definite line should be drawn in the dirt, regarding specious, hateful, and uncorroborated statements made by whomever. It doesn't mater whether they be Legislators, MSM bloviators, or any other high profile citizen; If you make a statement, such as Palin did with the "Death Panel" statement, you had better back it with facts, or pay a penalty.
What penalty? I have no idea, nor is it my place to suggest what might be considered, but some means should be made available and agreed upon by divergent factions, to insure that the people of this country are not unduly alarmed, or taken advantage of due to their collective lack of knowledge, or ignorance on a particularly important issue of the day.
The same way you are not allowed yell fire in a crowded theater and expect protection under "Freedom of Speech", you should not be able to invoke a phrase like "Death Panel" with impunity when there is absolutely no basis in fact within the context of any legislative consideration.
2 of 2
If that is too nuanced to understand, then maybe the level of ignorance in this country has become so pervasive, it may already be too late. But unless and until someone addresses this situation head on, our processes of governance as a republic will be subverted again, and again, by the true elite in this country. And I'm not speaking of the supposed liberal elite, as portrayed by some high placed, money advantaged, and politically, socially, and industrially powerful entities, in this country.
You know of whom I speak; The Rethuglican Partyand their Conservative Neo-Con cohorts.
Well the "liberal" NY Times had on the front page today a Tea Bagger screaming about the Constitution in Arlen Specter's face -- they could have had a photo of Obama's huge town hall he had yesterday if they are so "liberal" and aimed at helping Obama -- I'm so tired of the Tea Baggers and their whining and yelling.
No one will allow true reform to be discussed in the health care debate and we are being rail roaded into an extortionists plot to use government mussel to force us to purchase questionable insurance to pay exorbitant prices to a system that is failing to serve so many of us.
We are being royally screwed by our financial, energy, and health care systems that appear to be colluding with the legislators and regulators who are supposed to protect us. Enough is enough.
Delivering all government funded health care through government owned hospitals and clinics, operated by government employed doctors and care providers would save hundreds of billions of dollars annually.
A dual, public/private system, offering dual choices for everyone to select, either free public care, or unlimited choice private pay private care, could serve every need and interest.
Independent private health care should be unfettered by government mandates.
Going back and forth between free public care, paid for by a national sales tax, and user purchased private care, may suit some people, and it would provide unlimited choices, ultimate freedom, and always free public care would be available when it is needed or desired to everyone who asks for it, no restrictions period.
Businesses large and small choosing the public care option could also free themselves from all financial burdens, or any involvement in any way for the health services their employees receive.
Give us justice or there will be no peace.
I'm convinced that those who do oppose any kind of reform next expect it to get anywhere (because it hasn't over the past 40 years). All of the chaos and vitriol now shows me that these folks are pretty scared that this time it might just get done, and they'll do ANYTHING to try and stop it;.
The “Vocabulary” is right in the opening paragraph of the U.S. Constitution:
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. “
I can’t think of a better example of “promoting the general welfare” than making sick people well. Looking after the welfare of the people certainly includes prevention of disease, tending to the sick, curing those with ailments.
How would it be possible to defend ourselves and secure liberty if we are all sick? What kind of justice do we have if some people are allowed health care while others are not? How can you live a tranquil life if you are racked with screaming pain and horrible disease?
Mr. Palermo, it really comes down to this: They didn't think Obama would win the election let alone keep any campaign promises. And when he did, they all went bonkers.
We never saw these so-called "regular Americans with real concerns" during Bush's eight years of spending carnage. Alas, it takes a democrat in the White House (and a colored one at that) to get these rabble rousers fired up.
Yep!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
