Where is the truth on health care?

Reasoning against government health care is simple:  the opponents are mean, don’t like old people or sick people and don’t like the President because they are racist hillbillies.

Those in favor of government health care of course are godless, communist, socialist, evildoers who seek to steal all America has and give it to illegal immigrants, eliminate Medicare and assign death squads to anyone over 55 who owns a flag.

The truth is not somewhere in between, but unfortunately not even part of the debate.  Since our politicians and special interests have continued the growing trend of 1000+ page bills that are not seen by Congress, let alone the public, until voting time, we don’t even know exactly what to debate other than very broad concepts of government health care.  Instead we attack each other while special interests that will benefit most from any change plan for any outcome.

Special interests prefer we attack the messenger rather than discuss the message.  How many times have we seen reports of evil ruffians storming town hall meetings or of fanatical health care bill supporters yet little mention of the actual issue?

Who honestly believes that opponents want to see people sick and die or that proponents want worse care at more cost?  Both sides want to improve the system, but discussing how to do that is a threat to special interests.

Some democrats, frustrated the “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth”, being painted as “America-haters”, use of the word “liberal” as a punch line and the other machinations of a few right-wing manipulators, sought to create their own dirty-tricks campaign.  Be careful what you wish for:  At last some democrats have mastered the art of clever, misleading and outright untrue political techniques to ‘win’ the game of public opinion sound bytes.  We now have the worst of both worlds: people on both ‘sides’ (if we even know what a side is, other than a label) whose primary aim is not to solve problems but to make the other side look bad.  As a result, discussions of the issue suffer and we all lose.

When the CEO of Whole Foods, John Mackey, wrote an editorial “Eight things we can do to improve health care without adding to the deficit”, some called for boycott of his company.  Whole Foods wasn’t doing anything they didn’t like, most didn’t even argue his points, they assumed the messenger was an enemy and ignored his message.  Is the way to encourage debate and create solutions to vilify anyone who has an opinion?

Litanies of advertisements, websites, slick social media campaigns and clever, professionally produced viral videos aim to influence legislation.  Both sides have well-funded interests masquerading as grass roots.  Both ends of the spectrum have members who will stop at nothing for what they believe is the greater good.  One leader is CNBCs Rachel Maddow, who’s distain-filled broadcasts attack town hall and tea-party protestors as hate-mongering ignorant extremists without any substantive discussion of the issue.  Maddow, a huge critic of Bush’s war in Iraq and his bailout, is also a critic of Congressman Ron Paul, a medical doctor and an early and vocal opponent of the war and bailout who has little in common with her stated enemies, apparently, the (R) next to his name is enough to warrant ridicule and revulsion.  Maddow is everything her fans hated about Fox News’s worst commentators and more.

Not all manipulation is in the form of tirades; we also have people like Robert Reich, his passionate two-minute video about health care an Internet sensation.  Even the mild manner Reich is not being entirely honest.  In the video, Reich essentially states, “The public option is just another option, that’s all.”  That’s all?  As if some enterprising nephew of Uncle Sam just wants to simply give the people of Cleveland another option, that’s all.  Reich doesn’t address how much it costs us, who pays, how we pay, what we sacrifice and, most importantly, whose pockets the money actually goes in to.  In Reich’s defense, he doesn’t know because no one knows.  Reich lays claim on who is trying to stop it: the drug companies and insurance companies of course.  It is they who are presumably behind the town meeting interruptions.  Again, Reich is wrong, the Wall Street Journal reported that representatives of Merck, Pfizer and Abbot Labs met the White House Chief of Staff just before the administration backed off from allowing cheaper drugs to be imported from Canada.  Mr. Reich, should explain why the lobbyist Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America is so in favor of this plan or what exactly the health insurance companies expect in return for the millions that they have given to people like Sen. Max Baucus (Dem-Montana).  Baucus received money from Amgen, Medtronic, Blue Cross and Blue Shield, Schering-Plough, New York Life Insurance and the Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of America.  Mr. Reich, can also explain why AARP, who owns an insurance company with $600+ million in annual revenues would want to spend so much to pass this health care bill.  Are the executives at AARP eager to just help the public even if it means lower profits for them?

When Reich says that special interests from drug an insurance companies are against this bill, he either doesn’t know where the money is coming from or he is lying.   If he is not lying, others are.  Their agenda seems obvious: pass the bill and serve their greater good at all costs.  This kind of advertising is just as dishonest as opponents who claim democrats want to have “death squads”.

Once I shared a train ride with a sales trainer for unethical, fly by night companies.  His formula was simple:  if buyers dislike your product, get them to think they are buying the opposite, show them pain, give them a solution you know they wont like (he called it the ‘ugly orange car in the corner’) when fatigue sets in, pretend to call the manager and swoop in and ‘save the day’ with a product you proclaim is a major concession but was the true agenda all along.  Think of this next time you find yourself ‘negotiating’ for a lower price from a salesman, only to find yourself buying something even more expensive.  The engineers of the Iraq invasion would be proud.  They were brilliant in framing arguments where they would win either way.  We are now set that no matter which version of “reform” goes through; the insurance and drug companies will get their pound of flesh.

What better way for insurance and drug companies to strengthen their position, solidify their lead and enrich the executives than to enlist an army of do-gooders?  They pass their ideal legislation under the guise of ‘saving the sick’ and ‘sticking it too the insurance and drug companies’.  Just as well-meaning patriots were fooled by special interests into thinking that killing Iraqis would make America safer, well-meaning do-gooders are doing the bidding of their stated enemy.  It’s as if the health care lobby says, “call me names all you want, as long as you send me checks”.

There are many problems with health care and valid points on both sides.  One key step we can take is to demand that Congress actually read whatever bill might actually come up for vote, identify who wrote it and provide copies to the citizens.  The next thing we can do is abandon partisan name-calling and work together to sort through the mountain of propaganda to find the truth, or at least something closer to truth than what we have now.  Most of all we can follow the money and see if the place it leads serves our goals for health care.

by Bruce Fenton