It has been said that this week will be a make or break week on healthcare. There are rousing town hall meetings with "Rabble-Raisers" all over the south & the country for that matter. In many of these there has been a frequent and (almost) glorious chant, "READ THE BILL, READ THE BILL, READ THE BILL." Unfortunate for the hecklers who attempted to disrupt Congressman Barney Frank's meeting with his constituency because he actually did read the bill. They posited outrageous claims that any healthcare bill would allow illegal immigrants to receive free healthcare on the tax payers dime. Barney refuted this claim and received the rousing response, "Read the Bill, Read the Bill, Read the Bill" and so the Congressman (always willing to steal the show) flipped to the portion of the bill that banned illegal immigrants from receiving healthcare and the pertinent section.
Unfortunately for our republic is the fact that the debate over healthcare has become little more than buzzwords and political theater. Lost in rhetoric and not intelligent enough to actually read the bill themselves the citizenry are relying on others to decide what will be their truths. This can be good and bad, that is, relying on others to interpret, write, and execute the law. In our representative democracy we have shifted the need for the individual to be well versed in logic, rhetoric, and other important traits by giving this duty over to politicians. This is different than say the traditional Greek democracy where the average citizen was expected to be well versed in the said areas. Like I said the transfer of law making to an elected body is a good idea but it comes with consequences (the [= bad] part of the equation). When we become detached from the process of writing the laws we are ignorant of them and democracy has failed. In the same measure, if we become involved and are still too ignorant to interpret the political reality through which the laws are written democracy has failed. An uninformed voter isn't so dangerous as a misinformed voter. Relying on politicians can be dangerous but they still have to answer to their constituency. More dangerous and increasingly problematic is a politic relying on special interest groups and other lobbying efforts for their (mis)information.
Let me make a distinction on the last point. I don't mean all special interest groups are bad but that the ones attempting to misinform voters and (simply put) lie to them are not democratic. If it is true that we simply cannot say just what ever we want to or about people (as the status quo under the law would hold to be the case--if you need precedence think cyberbullying). Then many lobbying efforts and grass-roots misinformation campaigns that are successfully misinforming voters should be liable for gross negligence and prosecution.
The general rule for those questioning the intellect of the congresspeople now should be: "Do I really think my congressperson is doing X, Y, & Z unthinkable things? Wouldn't this make it hard for him/her to be re-elected and easy for an opponent to point out making for an easy election victory?" The answers to the previous questions are obvious. No politician is going to do something that is bad for his/her constituency (or so we would hope) because it would prevent their re-election and be bad for the country.
The outrageous claims are easy to come by these days. (Imagine this being said in a really deep scary voice that rattles you to the bone) "Barrack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid along with the Democratic Congress are trying to force a healthcare bill through the legislature that would 1) allow 'Illegal Immigrants' to have free healthcare on the tax payers' dime, 2) Lets bureaucrats get between you and your doctors, 3) that leads to 'Rationed Care', 4) will lead to long lines and 6 month plus waiting times for doctors, 5) Bankrupt the treasury, 6) force the 'democrats' to raise takes stifling the American Economy, 7) Won't allow you to get the care you need or the care needed by your loved ones.
I'll go through these pretty quick. 1-3 are just flat out lies and are not true. (Number two depends on how you view bureaucrats....Insurance Company Bureaucrats aren't held accountable by an electorate but instead stockholders that care about nothing but PROFIT....Government Bureaucrats are held accountable....Either Way there are still bureaucrats....so this is what we call the "lesser of two evils argument"... I choose the people I can vote for and against...the people not driven by profit (arguably.) Numbers 4 - 6 are usually presented by showing a geo-political map of the UK & CANADA and making the claim that they have waiting lines and had to raise taxes. I'll just mention the glaring problem with the previous rhetorical presentation by mentioning that the current methods for raising funds for healthcare are simply becoming more fiscally responsible and revising aspects of the already established government run healthcare programs. Also that the UK & CANADA are just two of many nations with government run healthcare systems. Ending as we began 7 is just a flat-out lie.
Young people must become active in speaking out against these lies and misconceptions about healthcare. We are the fastest growing cohort of the uninsured. These healthcare issues will profoundly impact our lives and guide us as we will shortly become the "Next Generation's Republic."
[I've tried to read the bill and have read a substantial portion of it and will admit that it is hard to digest even for someone who has (though limited) experience reading such bills. I focused on more of the contentious sections so that I myself was not relying on the truth as fabricated by others.] The point in mentioning this is that I know it is hard to stay engaged with all of the other things we are worrying about in our lives. We can't make this healthcare discussion a side-note to our daily lives because it will soon become a political reality we will have to grapple with. We're all busy but we must keep our work going and we must make our voices heard. We are citizens and We must demand that our voices are heard.Take a survey of the town hall meetings you're seeing on the NEWS and see if you can spot a young person. If you can then you might notice that there are a lot more older Americans present than younger ones. This is in part because they likely have more free time but most importantly that they CARE what is going to be done with Medicare/ Medicaid. We should CARE and (it is my belief that) WE DO CARE. So we need to be proactive and start getting our voices and opinions out in the open public. We voted in great numbers in 2009 and we cannot let this be the end of our civic engagement. IT IS OUR DUTY AS CITIZENS TO STAND AND LET OUR VOICES BE HEARD. THAT DUTY IS ESPECIALLY IMPORTANT NOW AS THERE ARE PEOPLE LYING, DECEIVING, AND EVADING THE TRUTH ABOUT HEALTHCARE.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I whole-heartedly agree.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, I know it's pretty easy to mock the rural and/or Southern voters of America, but generally speaking, they are the backbone of voting in this country--and the President and Congress are going to follow through with their wishes or be removed from office in the next election. I find it interesting that so many "misinformed" people were causing such a stir in the town hall meetings that the President flip-flopped on the role of the "public option" in health care reform. He's a smart man--and he knows what will happen if he upsets the hillbillies. Like them or not, they are there and they will not be disappointed without severe consequences. The majority of America lives in either the South or a "small town" and to go against the majority's opinion goes against the foundations that this country was founded upon. And before it is rebuted that most Americans DO support President Obama's health care plans--you should probably check out how many members the AARP has lost this year due to their support of his plan...
ReplyDeleteI'm sure Mr. Frank believes that illegal immigrants won't be helped under the health care reform bill, but he is terribly mistaken [because a politician would never lie!] in his claim. Today, Mr. Obama made a statement that clearly proves illegal immigrants WOULD be treated on the tax payer's dime [check out my RealClearPolitics link at the bottom for the video]. If that's so, then I will take Mr. Obama's understanding of the bill rather than Mr. Frank's--he is the President is he not?
I'm all too amused by the fact that J.J. made 1-7 points and 4 of the 7 were proved wrong by calling them "flat out lies" and #6 was excused because it's "fiscally responsible." Being fiscally responsible is a good thing, but so is keeping taxes low. The fact of the matter is that taxes WILL go up because funding has to come from somewhere. That is not an evil plot on behalf of the Government, but rather a consequence of expansion of Government itself. If we are to allow our Government to grow, then we must also shrink [in our wallets at least]. Sometimes it's a better option to raise taxes because it is more important for the funding to be in place, but in the worst recession we've seen since the 1940's I would say take a rain check...
I think it is important to find a solution to the health care problem, but a public option is the last thing I would like to see. If it is instituted, it will probably be removed at the end of its charter, or at the soonest point the Republicans regain a majority in Congress.
Haha, whoops. Forgot the link.
ReplyDeleteHere it is:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/08/20/obama_basic_standard_of_decency_allows_illegals_to_be_treated.html
First, What do you consider "rationed care"? Because in my understanding the health care plan would in fact choose who will and will not receive certain procedures under the plan based on patient history and other health factors. This would be what I would consider "rationed".
ReplyDeleteAlso, as Richard pointed it would seem to fund a public option we would need to raise taxes or risk falling further into debt or "bankrupting the U.S. treasury" as point 5 put it. So it would seem with a public option either point 5 or point 6 is at least partially valid.
Finally, to elaborate on the possible future overturning of the bill with the marginal success that has met the health-care bill as well as the seeming tendency of both liberals and conservatives to ride party lines it would seem likely that the liberal congress passing a bill would only lead to a conservative congress overturning it as soon as they regain control.