healthcarereform
#thankyou senators #susancollins #johnmccain #lisamurkowski for your no #votes and for doing what is right over what is politically expedient. #healthcare #healthcarereform #obamacare #aca #maverick #medicaid #medicare
Over the last few months, I have taken part in a number of ad hoc online discussion on facebook and other places about health care. In a number of cases I was responding to the challenges of conservative friends. I've tried to pull that content together here.
Ethics: Is health care a right or a privilege?
Many folks have said that health care isn't a right. Its an interesting argument. If health care is a privilege and not a right than are conservatives saying health care is only for the privileged? The people without health insurance are not the poor (they are covered by Medicaid). The people without health insurance are working folks who aren't poor enough to get Medicaid and aren't well off enough to afford health insurance. If its not a right, who should go without? Who makes that decision and by what criteria?
These fundamental questions seems to be a stumper for folks on the right. With such an argument, you put the honus back on the conservative position to determine who should go without. Should people go without health care simply because they can not afford it? Essentially we ask, Who among us would deny essential health care simply because of their financial position? Such questions are unsettling not only because they reveal the conservative position as heartless, but also because we have long established our Western system of ethics around health care through the Hippocratic oath. Doctors are obligated to provide care through such an oath as it provides much of the basis for our medical establishment today.
In so many of the arguments you will not hear anything about guaranteeing affordable coverage for all, nor confronting big insurance companies that deny or drop coverage, or anything about accountability for insurance companies within the system. Rather the Right has thrown together a series of dishonest proxies such as death panels, socialism, Nazism, and other ridiculous bogeymen. Associating the ethical goal of covering all Americans with such, riles up a populist sentiment among the radical right, but such hyperbole easily falls by the wayside when confronted with both rational arguments and facts.
As President Obama stated in speech to Congress, providing health care is about our moral character as a nation. Every other civilized country (and plenty of uncivilized ones) in the world guarantees health care to their citizens. The United States joining the world in guaranteeing health care to citizens is as statement of our fundamental moral values and ethical principles. Fundamental to achieving life, liberty and happiness is that your health is maintained through both your own personal maintenance of health and the guarantee that should you get sick, medical care will be available to you.
Next time: Economics - Is there reason for the government to act?
All of the great progressive political leaders were smiling down on the US last night as the House vote tally flipped to the magical number of 216. JFK, RFK. LBJ, FDR, MLK, Harry, Truman, Teddy Kennedy and Roosevelt, and yes, even Richard Nixon, must have been saying its about time. I sat rivited most of the day to the debate on the floor of the House wating for information as to how the votes would break. The leadership had expressed confidence for days but you never know when it comes to actually voting.
After all the zig and zags of legislative sausage making, after all the comments from the pundrity and the blogosphere, after all the vitriole and falsehoods coming from the Right, Health Care Reform and its coverage of 32 million more Americans, and its limitations on the horrendous excesses of the insurance industry are now put into law. Americans will now join the rest of the civilized world in assuring its citizens access to health care.
I have spent a lot of time, perhaps too much time, arguing with conservatives on this issue over the last few months. One thing that amazed me frankly is that many do not accept as a basic principle that health care is a human right, that it is in fact necessary to fulfll the promise of the "life" part of the Declaration's inalieanable rights: "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." I often found myself boxing conservatives in on this issue though, because if health care isn't a right, than its a privilege. I often asked this question: "If health care is a privilege, than who should receive health care, and by what critieria?" Of course we know that the critieria which our society has used to date, if you aren't poor enough for Medicaid, old enough for Medicare, or don't have a good enough job that provides health care or enough money for you to purchase your own insurance. So we are left with, you get health care, if your kid is sick or you come down with cancer, if you can afford it. What a shallow criteria for a life and death matter.
Many on the Right starting crowing about a victory in November when Scott Brown unexpectedly won in Massachusetts in January. Many said health care reform was dead. The votes weren't there, etc. They continue to bring out the same tired arguments about socialism and totalitarianism that were leveled against Medicare and Social Security.
I received many threats today similar to those made on the floor. "I can't wait till November." "We'll see what happens in November." "You'll be sorry in November." These threats seem hollow and a little bit of sour grapes. Even if the Democrats lose control of both house of Congress (which is highly unlikely), I won't be all that upset. I'm less concerned with victory than I am with success. Electoral victory is fleeting. Policy success affects people's lives immensely in ways that electoral victories do not. With the passage of HCR, our country become a more decent place, and we have seen success from Congress and Obama.
Similarly, Obama has put a strategy into place that is tracking down terrorist in Pakistan and Afghanistan and our troops and CIA agents are successful.
Similarly, the President has brought us back from the economic brink brought on by greed and a marketplace which could not regulate itself to understand risk, there for risking the economic security of all in our country.
Despite the angry rhetoric and falsehoods from member of the Right, Obama has been successful, making them even more angry (the latest were threats of violence from Tea Partiers yesterday). The Right is marginalizing itself with its inability to discuss policy in a civil manner, resorting instead to falsehoods, accusations, anger mixed with some racism, xenophobia and homophobia from a smaller minority. This angry Right (which I should distinguish from thinking conservatives such as Andrew Sullivan and David Brooks) may achieve victory in November, but we saw how successful at governing they are under Bush and a Republican Congress for much of the last decade. In short, despite victories, not a lot of success at all. As Bush speech writer David Frum said today, the GOP has associated itself with the angry fringe, rather than seeking reason and compromise. They can choose anger and that may generate a short-term electoral victory and it may not. In any case, anger and refusing to reason is not a recipe for long-term political success.
And on the other side, Democrats must now implement the reform and continue to state their case to the American people. For just a minute, though it was nice to bask in the historical gravity of this moment. Martin Luther King Jr. said that "the arc of history bends towards justice." Last night, it bent a little more and Obama and Pelosi wrote their names in marble in the US History books.