Obama's Health Care Pitch Should Be Less, Er, "Christian"

Until recently, Obama has emphasized two rationales for health care reform -- reducing the burden on the economy and providing universal coverage. One attempts to appeal to our sense of fiscal responsibility, another to our conscience. "The cost of our health care has weighed down our economy and the conscience of our nation long enough," he said in February. Both require us to think long term and altruistically -- admirable but not traditionally the best way to mobilize public opinion.

If he's looking for ideas on how to craft his national message, I would suggest he not copy the rhetoric of the increasingly-energized religious left. The liberal Christian group Sojourners emphasizes Jesus' injunction to help "the least of these." In a letter on behalf of the Catholic Bishops Conference, Bishop William Murphy wrote, "Reform efforts must begin with the principle that decent health care is not a privilege, but a right and a requirement to protect the life and dignity of every person."

This is certainly what you'd want Christian leaders to say -- and will be effective, one would hope, with many of the devout -- but if the argument for health care comes down to helping people other than yourself, we'll get many good sermons and no health care reform.

Obama and the religious leaders would be wise to marry an appeal to self interest with a moral message based on justice rather than altruism.

For instance, here are some moral statements more likely to appeal to those who have insurance (the majority):

--A system is immoral if it allows (or encourages) insurance companies to turn you away exactly when you need help most. (Thanks to exclusions for "pre-existing conditions.") That's unfair.

--A system is immoral if it allows (and incentivizes) insurance companies to write policies full of fine print that leaves shocked patients with devastating bills. That's dishonest.

--A system is immoral if it means that losing one's job means not only losing income but the ability to take your child to the doctor. That's cruel.

--A system is immoral if it forces people to stay in jobs that they hate because they don't want to lose their health coverage. That's tragic.

These moral statements may resonate more broadly because they emphasize the universal value of fairness, rather than compassion. Forgive my gross theological oversimplication but I suspect the message needs a bit less Jesus and a little bit more Moses; a bit less New Testament, a bit more Old; a bit less love and a bit more justice.

More from Steven Waldman at Beliefnet here.

Comments

[researcher]

christianity dies on the cross

not until 50% of americans have problems with health care will we see real health care reform.

just like non smoking laws

the smokers cared less about non smokers rights as they the smokers lit up

the same will be true for real health care reform

guarantee you the most people against health care reform are christians.

ok and those from the southern states

you know you live in an imperialist country when many of your citizens protest against health care reform but support our wars for profits and even give special benfits to those that fight in our wars for profits

[Zanti]

When you have a chance, do some reading on the topic. Most Americans support healthcare reform.

And, if reading isn't an acceptable option to you, watch the news once in a while.

[Guitarsandmore]

Look at the philosophy of the Defense Department: " Be able to win the war with overwhelming force - (and oh by the way that means big bucks)".

Why are we trying to do health care on the cheap? what is the philosophy there? Starve the patient and the disease with a lack of funds? Why are we not using overwhelming force to defeat heart disease or cancer or any of the other health related issues?

We need a new philosophy in the United States that puts the priority of health care on par with the military investments we make.

We spend 10 tens more on the military than China which is the next highest spender. Yet a country like Denmark has health care for all and also has an army.

When was the last time you heard about Denmark getting invaded? If the rest of the world can have a military on less money, why can't we? If other countries can have a single payer health care system why can't we?

[Dap]

Well said GaM, well said indeed.

[Mannamom]

Given that capitalism espouses Ayn Rand and her 'altruism is sin' philosophy - you're totally right that capitalistic Americans will never buy something that purports to be actually atruistic...

What I can't figure is how all those 'life is precious' people can go along so wholeheartedly with killing over 18000 people a year by refusing them health care.

[mcmchugh99]

Ayn Rand is nothing but a very wordy rehash of pre-1870 economists who are now forgottem by just about every except historians,

[hrholmes]

‘Jesus wants us to take care of the least of us’. Unfortunately he is not a citizen but an undocumented alien with pre-existing conditions that no private for profit insurer would cover. He may however qualify for Medicaid and Medicare due to his advanced age.

[noneIn2008]

Let the states handle health care. 50 different experiments so that when you have mistakes like Mass, not everyone gets hit. Washington normally makes big mistakes with huge unintended consequences? The states will make better decisions on smaller scales so mistakes will be more easily reversed.

[socalgal38]

at it again i see

[loveleadershiporg]

"Forgive my gross theological oversimplication but I suspect the message needs a bit less Jesus and a little bit more Moses; a bit less New Testament, a bit more Old; a bit less love and a bit more justice."
__________­__________­__________­__________­___

Nowhere in the New Testament do we read that Jesus bankrupted His ministry to heal the sick (even though Judas was the treasurer-John 13:29 NLT). As for Old Testament justice, Psalm 107:20 tells us that, "He (God) sent his word, and healed them, and delivered them from their destructions." Could it be that we, as a nation, are looking to the wrong source for deliverance from our health destructions?

Matthew 14:14
And Jesus went forth, and saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion toward them, and he healed their sick.

[melodramy]

Terrific. Let us know how that works out for you.

[csavage]

I would agree, except.....right wing Christians feel, in many instances, that the poor and downtrodded have achieved their status through their lack of effort. Never mind that many of the nation's uninsured are people working fulltime in jobs that do not provide health insurance. It's of little use to appeal to fairness when you are dealing with a culture that judges what's fair in what you've earned, not what's right. These people look at healthcare as a privilege and they've earned the right to have that privilege.
I reference the "Protestant work ethic" as my source and also add that "Cafeteria Catholics" are actually "Closet Protestants" in many cases, health insurance for all being one of those cases

[melodramy]

Yes, no argument based on values, neither compassion nor justice , will be effective against those who see everyone ELES's problems like losing a job, being denied coverage even though you had insurance, not able to care for a sick child, as WELL-DESERVED problems, and symtoms both of personal defect and probably lack of good standing with "god."

These people are completely unable to put themselves in the shoes that they are just as likely to find themselves in as the next hardworking guy...illness and corporate downsizing are hardly respecters of persons. It truly boggles the mind.

Lack of empathy is the number one trait of sociopathy and I swear it seems we've got half a country of them.

[yappnmutt]

morality is a subjective measure depending upon the individual citing or controlling the morals.

love and compassion is the absence of selfishness. simple. incontrovertible.

[Jodo]

How about citing a quote from Martin Luther King, the man he used to get elected President.. "Of all the forms of inequality, injustice in health care is the most shocking and inhumane."

[venkyvilla]

It is silly, we need to have a strong "health care reform". Please do not bring religion in here...don't you agree that Insurance groups, Hospitals, Pharmacy companies and doctors, even this big GOP guys are playing drama, and every step they are lobbying in washington dc?? They are. Pres. Obama, please fix this health care now....and talk...I bet you will be remembered for ever in history books of American High Schools...God bless you, pres. obama, we need to have this health care now...in our greatest nation on earth...fix health care and talk further...ok

[kitkatborn]

This isn't a religious thing, it's a question of ethics. The Mosaic system is based on an ethical code of law.

[daffey]

An ethical code of law based upon a theological system of belief.

[Balancement]

And here are some helpful, practical secular facts:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-rachlis3-2009aug03%2C0%2C538126.story

[Bernique]

Mr. Waldman,

In your "a system is immoral" ranking, points 1 and 2 will be addressed, perhaps, by the elusive public option now churning through congress. Points 3 and 4 will not, as they are tied to employment, and no one is talking about decoupling health "insurance" from employment. Yet, we are the only country that ties health security to being in the work force!

Why this is not discussed baffles me. The greatest freedom would be to liberate employers from having to devote resources to churning papers for their employees' health, and the greatest freedom for employees would be to get health care outside of the work place. This state of affairs puts US employers at a disadvantage in the global market place, or perhaps, it gives them incentives to outsource jobs!

[WilliamBradford]

There are many insurance plans that exist today that are not tied to an employer. These are purchased by self-employed people or other non-traditionally employed people. They tend to be expensive, but that is because they deal with a limited pool of insured and are not subsidized by an employer.

Many of those opposed to the current legislative direction on Health Care would be very willing to discuss revolutionizing health insurance by decoupling it from employment, eliminating "pre-existing condition" policies, standardizing the fine print, and opening the market to more open competition. This would address most of the problems and would not require nationalizing the system.

[melodramy]

However it would not eliminate the execessive administrative costs, CEO salaries + bonuses, necessary shareholder returns and excessive drug prices (vs. every other country) as the non-value-added expenses built into our health care system vis a vis our non-health­-care-deli­vering profiteering middlemen.

[socalgal38]

That is why I am for the Universal Single Payer system. It frees the employer and the employee.

[ladyv]

I am neither religious nor squishy, and I find the fact that my daughter and I have to live in the same world as other people and their kids and thus are negatively affected by widespread ill health and poverty (since the latter leads to violence and squalor and depressed properties) to be plenty of reason to support efforts to get the populace at large to a reasonable baseline. Yes, I get to decide what "reasonable" is. The status quo is not it.

I don't get helicoptered on and off my estate. I am not wealthy enough to isolate myself from potentially sick people, from uneducated people, from desperate people. I will never be that wealthy. Therefore, it benefits me if there are fewer sick, uneducated, desperate people near me. The only feasible way to achieve this is to improve the overall standard of living here.

Republicans are so sadistic that they would rather see other people suffer than relieve that suffering to benefit themselves. It's idiotic.

[tnlcallen]

that sounds terribly elitist. I get what you are saying, you just have a bad way of saying it.
Those unwashed masses are people too.

[daffey]

You picked up on that too. I noticed a certain elitism on how it was being said.

[ladyv]

I'm white trash. I can say it however I want.

[baseballmom]

Actually, I think ladyv is saying that she is one of the masses and NOT one of the wealthy elite.

[Sundialsvc4]

It is not merely "immoral" to spend the vitality of one's own nation -- both the money in its coffers and the very blood of its youth -- while making no adequate provision for the people who must live there.

It is utter savagery to sacrifice the young, while making no efforts toward the sustenance of the old; nor of those who are merely sick.

It is, furthermore, hopelessly short-sighted to ignore the fact that every one of us are doomed to face the very same "Exit" sign, and that we shall go to our graves as empty-handed as anyone before us has done. And yet, every one of us has within ourselves the power to make that way easy for another man, or cruel and hopeless; to offer a cup of water, or to withhold it.

Those men, and those Governments, who would withhold such a cup of simple mercy, should not just fear Eternal judgment, for they stand condemned already among their fellow men. They are not worthy of admiration, but should be utterly reviled. They should not be allowed to stand in our sacred halls of power one day more, emptily pretending to represent their own people while they send many millions of those people to Despair.

[obriend]

Jesus never called for government to provide healthcare to those less fortunate. He called for His church to take care of the least of these -- not the government. And Jesus was right. We should not be seeking government-led insurance -- we should be mobilizing the church more to take care of His children.

[medicare4all]

Yes, health delivery by the Jehovah Witnesses or the Christian Scientists ...

[Balancement]

Too busy bashing gays and blessing guns to take care of the sick.

[daffey]

The Church, despite its unforgivable sin of not agreeing with you, does quite a bit to take care of the sick, the underprivileged, the suffering. Has for two thousand years. That isn't to say it can improve - who can't? But to suggest it doesn't at all is a gross misrepresentation of the facts.

[obriend]

Jesus subscribes to neither doctrine. Nor do I. While I agree that homosexuality is a sin -- and I do not condone it -- you won't find me casting a stone in that direction. I'm just as sinful as anyone.

[clintonius]

And I'm guessing you have healthcare. Put the shoe on the other foot.

[WilliamBradford]

Exactly right. Jesus - and some of his later followers: the founding fathers of the United States of America - was a revolutionary because he brought the idea that every individual was valuable. We were not defined by Ceasar, or "the church", or by some social caste system. We are equal and responsible for ourselves. We should do our best with what we are given and help each other as we are able. This same value is what inspired the founders of our country and nothing about this would support the government that is evolving today.

It's amazing how eager people are to trade one master - Big Medicine, Big Pharma, etc. - for another even larger master - Big Government. If what we want is freedom and justice, an immense and powerful government is not the answer.

[daffey]

That, I think, is where the problem is. Most people I know feel the system needs fixed. But many are beginning to think that the solutions at hand will simply take it from one big monster - corporate greed - and hand it to another big monster - big government.

[socalgal38]

Wow, I remember the Patriot Act. I didn't hear a republican bashing giving up their rights to Big Government. Oh No! That would have been unpatrotic for anyone to speak against the last Administration's power hungry ideals.

[kitkatborn]

The world that Jesus lived in was very different from our world. We cannot say what He would say if faced with this increasingly complex world.

[obriend]

The technology is very different. The struggles and issues are essentially the same.