« So humanity, just where is it you think you're going with all this? | tpmgary's Blog | Is there a village missing its minority? »
Healthcare vs. Highwayrobberycare
Inspired by a post by Ripper, I thought this summed up the choice your elected officials have regarding health reform pretty succinctly. The only other option to healthcare is the status quo. It's what we have right now.
And no matter how you look at it, the status quo is highway robbery.
It is an unsustainable system that is not only bankrupting Americans. It is killing them. Rescission is as close as insurance companies can get to a license to kill. Dropping someone's coverage right at the moment they most need it is criminal.
Imagine waking up tomorrow, wondering which will spread faster, health reform or your cancerous tumor?
We need reform now. And regardless of what the medical industrial complex or lobbyists or pundits say, this is not a complicated issue.
Your rep or Senator is either fighting for healthcare.
Or fighting for highwayrobberycare.
And no matter how you look at it, the status quo is highway robbery.
It is an unsustainable system that is not only bankrupting Americans. It is killing them. Rescission is as close as insurance companies can get to a license to kill. Dropping someone's coverage right at the moment they most need it is criminal.
Imagine waking up tomorrow, wondering which will spread faster, health reform or your cancerous tumor?
We need reform now. And regardless of what the medical industrial complex or lobbyists or pundits say, this is not a complicated issue.
Your rep or Senator is either fighting for healthcare.
Or fighting for highwayrobberycare.
Advertisement
Even the sidewalks aren't safe. I'm a pedestrian. Sidewalkrobberycare isn't as useful a term as highwayrobberycare. To do my part, I'll walk in the street until healthcare reform is passed.
Thanks for the post.
August 13, 2009 1:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good one Gary. But I don't think it's a manichean black or white strategy that's got much grip to it. Everyone agrees the present system is terrible, and all opponents really need is something that can be plausible construed as a dealbreaker. The fact that they need to grasp for crazy straws like the death panels shows just how good this bill is.
There is literally nothing bad about this bill. Think about it. That's all they could find! THEY'VE GOT NOTHING!! That - the absence of serious anti-reform talking points - is the real case for the reform package. I don't know why the White House isn't hammering this more. Instead they're panicking...
August 13, 2009 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I pretty much agree with you. Although I think there are lots of politicians who are just claiming they are for reform, when in fact, they are for blocking every effort along the way. They'll pick some part of the bill, they'll find something to rally against, a public option, co-ops, it could be anything. I think these politicians are hiding, essentially. And creating myths that confuse people.
Simplicity rules. Politicians are either working every day to support reform legislation, to contribute ideas on improving upon the system we have now, (which isn't very difficult), or you are out there every day doing everything you can to kill it.
August 13, 2009 2:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was just an idea that hit me when I read your piece. None of the anti-reform TP's really hooked until the death panels. None of the substantial points related to the rough reform package were plausible so they had to reach for the fantastical. But I take your general point. Call out the obstructionists!
August 13, 2009 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
True, the fact that one has to reach into the land of the absurd to find anything to rally against in terms of health reform is very revealing.
I wonder, how do we evaluate which fantastical rhetoric is gaining the most traction. We could easily assume that the death panel fiction is really catching on, but what constitutes "catching on" in all this madness?
The media amplifies what it chooses, does it not? And the media is notorious for being out of step with the reality of what is really going on in America, isn't it? Sure, they can broadcast the thugs and craziness at the town halls, but does that really represent what most people feel about health care in America? Or are they just offering more PR for what is essentially an astroturf beltway lobbyists marketing plan?
August 13, 2009 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think the media 'chooses'. Like moths, they're just viscerally attracted to 'flames'. They've not broadcast the broad set of uncontroversial reforms that have been the basic core of the package since the beginning. The big stuff that makes a difference. Because they're uncontroversial. If you can't have a flame war about an issue, it's a non-issue. Now 'death panel', how can you resist that? That brings in the viewers, crapping themselves.
But it still amazes me how they've managed to gin up more fear of the reform package than fear of the status quo - they could have rEEEAlly scared people by telling them that even if they think they have insurance, they don't - denial of coverage, rescission, problems with COBRA, etc. Maybe not as exciting as 'death panel', but still...
Another thing is people on Medicare. They're happy, and right to be happy. Things can't get better for them, only worse. And if you create a little uncertainty, that maybe the government will start telling you when to die, then that can easily tip the balance in their minds, just from a self-interested point of view. But also, the bill's justification is mainly moral - other regarding; it's about giving decent health care to all. And if someone hands you a half-baked, half-plausible reason to be against an otherwise moral imperative - BUT THEY'LL KILL ME - then that's a convenient excuse to believe the reason given. Our epistemic standards are pretty weak when it comes to beliefs that make us feel better about ourselves and our motives.
Okay, I'm rambling...
August 13, 2009 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gary,
I agree with your overall point but would suggest that you are aiming for two different issues with separate solutions. In the name of the second amendment, you'll be needing two different guns.
The price of healthcare doesn't mean a thing to someone who can't get reasonable insurance. We need to take aim at getting level playing access to insurance for all and then deal with what the cost of an MRI should be. That is, first break the insurance company monopoly and then we will discuss how much to pay for a procedure. Example, I would not expect to pay that much of a difference for a car in Texas vs. Ohio, why should it be different for aspirin at any given hospital.
I believe that part of the reason people are so distracted by the fringe peanut gallery is a lack of a clear and simplified understanding of the problem. A solution or plan would be better defended against the fearmonger-grannysaving-deathpanel rabble if we had clear talking points. KISS principle.
August 13, 2009 3:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Ripper had the right idea in his last post. Try to find one simple powerful message to communicate that breaks through all the reform and anti-reform clutter. What hits home? What can you not argue with? Not poke a hole through. Is there a set of words that we can all rally behind?
August 13, 2009 3:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed,
Some of the most memorable moments in the history of our country have concerned achievements for equality.
We should frame this argument better along the lines of "equal access to healthcare for all."
Access = success!
August 13, 2009 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Medicare for Everyone.
Of course, no one is seriously proposing this, the simplest, most logical, solution.
By trying to maintain the present system, you automatically make the subject confusing and complex and leave yourself open to misinformation and disinformation.
Medicare for Everyone. Questions? Ask you grandmother.
How much simpler can this message get?
August 14, 2009 11:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't disagree with your premise, but I don't think your hoped-for solution exists. This is U.S. healthcare, fer crissakes! It's NOT simple. It's complicated. It's ugly. It's got dozens of competing special interests. (Geez, wouldn't it be great if the American electorate could be a special interest!?)
IMO, this is one of the unfortunate problems of us Democrats in general, and Obama in particular. Being of the more edumacated persuasion (typically), we'll want to listen and hear all the pertient facts of an issue, so we can make an informed, thoughful opinion. Nothing untoward about that, right?
But, it might take thirty seconds, or two minutes to explain how a particular provision of HR3200 works, for example. Thanks to Nintendo, MTV, cable news and the Interwebs, (combined wiith the inadequacies of the current public educaton system) Americans now have the attention span of a fruit fly. They can't pay attention and sit through a thirty second explanation, let alone think critcally for that long.
Instead, they hear "Death Panels," and that prompts a quick, emotional response. No thinking needed.
As much as it pains me to think we might need to dumb-down our level of "fucking discourse," as Rahm might say, maybe, to compete against the "Obama's gonna kill granny" pablum coming out of the wingers, we need to come up with our own pithy catch-phrases.
How about "People or Profits"?
August 13, 2009 7:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nice catchy phrase!
August 13, 2009 8:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, "People before Profits" might be even more to the point, now that I think about it some mo'.
August 13, 2009 10:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good reminder. I felt like Ripper got ripped off but one out of ten blogs aint bad. I even got there late. And Amike has a good blog on this as well.
A lot of regular health care/health insurance discourse here. And then..
I mean look at your response today!!!!
August 13, 2009 9:28 PM | Reply | Permalink