 |
 Latest |
 Greatest |
 Lobby |
 Journals |
 Search |
 Options |
 Help |
 Login |
| Home » Discuss » Journals » Time for change » Read entry |  |
 Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs! |
THE UNFULFILLED PROMISE
As Congress considers voting down health care legislation that contains a public health insurance option that Americans may choose in place of currently available private health insurance, they – and we – should consider a few things.
The most fundamental consequence of failure to include a public option in health care “reform” legislation will be that the plan will involve massive government subsidy of the private insurance industry. There will be several very negative consequences that accrue from that simple fact: Greater expense and less coverage Since private health insurance is much more expensive than government health insurance, that means that the plan will of necessity be characterized by one of three very serious problems, or more likely by a combination of those three problems: Either it will 1) be far more expensive; 2) cover far fewer people; or 3) cover far less health care for those who have insurance than a plan that contains a strong public option would. There is no getting around this. It is simple arithmetic. Those who complain about the expense of a public option are woefully ignorant or they are hypocrites. Private health insurance is far more expensive than public insurance, for some very simple reasons. The plan will either cost far more, or it will cover far less. There are several reasons why private health insurance necessarily costs far more than government health insurance compared to what we get for it. Private insurance companies spend money on the following items, which a government sponsored plan would not have to spend:
So take your pick – greater expense, less coverage, or a combination of both. Some have complained that a public option plan will also subsidize the health insurance industry, because some people will choose to use their government subsidies to purchase private insurance. That is true in some sense. However, the competition provided by a decent government plan should more than offset the advantage of those subsidies. In fact, Pulitzer Prize winning economist Paul Krugman believes that a strong government sponsored public health option will kill the private insurance industry because they will not be able to compete with it. And that is precisely why they have spent so many millions of dollars lobbying against a public option. Income inequality Extreme income inequality is a good indication that large segments of society lack the opportunity to make a decent living. It is also a formula for expanding social and political inequality, and it thus creates a vicious cycle. The graph pictured below has great relevance to today’s situation. In the late 1920s income inequality rose precipitously, to peak just prior to the Stock Market Crash of 1929, which precipitated the Great Depression. The graph plots income inequality in the United States over time, as calculated by the ratio between the average income of the top 0.01% of U.S. families and the bottom 90%:  The bottom line lesson of this graph is that major economic inequality is followed by economic depression. Following onset of the Great Depression, President Roosevelt leveled the economic playing field with his New Deal, which helped greatly to bring us out of the Depression. With the onset of Reagan economics about a half a century later (which included the dismantling of many New Deal programs), and again with the onset of George W. Bush’s economic policies, economic inequality began to skyrocket again – which helped to bring us to our present state of affairs. Paul Krugman, in his book, “The Conscience of a Liberal”, discusses the importance of universal health care as one big step towards leveling the playing field: The principal reason to reform American health care is simply that it would improve the quality of life for most Americans… There is, however, another important reason for health care reform. It’s the same reasons movement conservatives were so anxious to kill Clinton’s plan. That plan’s success, said William Kristol, “would signal the rebirth of centralized welfare-state policy” – by which he really meant that universal health care would give new life to the New Deal idea that society should help its less fortunate members. Indeed it would – and that’s a big argument in its favor… Getting universal care should be the key domestic priority for modern liberals. Once they succeed there, they can turn to the broader, more difficult task of reigning in American inequality. But how will health care “reform” that is characterized mainly by a massive transfer of taxpayer dollars to the health insurance industry help towards reducing income inequality to decent levels? I don’t see how it can. In all likelihood it would greatly expand the wealth and power of the insurance industry – which they would of course use to rig the system even further in their favor. That is a scary thought. Considerations of fairness The health insurance industry has been given their chance. Under their control, the cost of health care continues to soar, along with their profits. Many millions of Americans have found their legitimate health care claims denied in their hour of need, after pouring their hard earned money into health care premiums for much of their lives. And the opponents of government sponsored health insurance scream about the dangers of government rationing of health care! What a joke! The same politicians who tout the “free market” and market competition as a supreme value are the ones who whine and complain that a public option insurance plan will hurt private insurance companies – as they accept hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribery… I mean campaign contributions from them. Yes, indeed it will. That’s too bad. They’ve had their chance. If they can’t stand the heat of the competition, then they should get out of the business. What our best economists have to say about the need for a public health option Let’s take a look at what our best economists have to say about this. Coincidentally – or NOT – these are the same people who warned us against bailing out failing banks with hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money. They warned us against doing that for much the same reasons as they are now using to warn us against a massive government subsidy of the insurance industry: Paul Krugman On August 20th Paul Krugman wrote about the futility of trying to appease Republicans in the Obama administration’s quest to enact meaningful health care reform: But there’s a point at which realism shades over into weakness, and progressives increasingly feel that the administration is on the wrong side of that line. It seems as if there is nothing Republicans can do that will draw an administration rebuke: Senator Charles E. Grassley feeds the death panel smear, warning that reform will “pull the plug on grandma,” and two days later the White House declares that it’s still committed to working with him. It’s hard to avoid the sense that Mr. Obama has wasted months trying to appease people who can’t be appeased, and who take every concession as a sign that he can be rolled. Indeed, no sooner were there reports that the administration might accept co-ops as an alternative to the public option than G.O.P. leaders announced that co-ops, too, were unacceptable. So progressives are now in revolt. Mr. Obama took their trust for granted, and in the process lost it. And now he needs to win it back. On August 23rd Krugman wrote about what he describes as the inanity of the hysterical arguments against the public health option: The debate over the public option has, as I said, been depressing in its inanity. Opponents of the option – not just Republicans, but Democrats like Senator Kent Conrad and Senator Ben Nelson – have offered no coherent arguments against it. Mr. Nelson has warned ominously that if the option were available, Americans would choose it over private insurance – which he treats as a self-evidently bad thing, rather than as what should happen if the government plan was, in fact, better than what private insurers offer… How will this all work out? I don’t know. But it’s hard to avoid the sense that a crucial opportunity is being missed, that we’re at what should be a turning point but are failing to make the turn. Robert Reich Robert Reich, President Clinton’s former Secretary of Labor, recently wrote about the futility of leaving our health care insurance needs in the hands of private insurers: Without a public, Medicare-like option, health care reform is a bandaid for a system in critical condition. There's no way to push private insurers to become more efficient and provide better value to Americans without being forced to compete with a public option. And there's no way to get overall health-care costs down without a public option that has the authority and scale to negotiate lower costs… He explains why private insurance companies are so aggressively against the public option: … A public option would cut deeply into their current profits. That's why they've been willing to spend a fortune on lobbyists, threaten and intimidate legislators and ordinary Americans, and even rattle Obama's cage to the point where the Administration is about to give up on it. And he offers political advice to our elected representatives and to us: The White House wonders why there hasn't been more support for universal health care coming from progressives, grass-roots Democrats, and Independents. I'll tell you why. It's because the White House has never made an explicit commitment to a public option… If Obama tells Senate Democrats he will not sign a healthcare reform bill without a public option, there WILL BE enough votes in the United States Senate for a public option. I urge you to make it absolutely clear to everyone you know, everyone who cares about universal health care and what it will mean to our country, that the bill must contain a real public option. Tell that to your representatives in Congress. Tell that to the White House… If you are receiving piles of emails from the Obama e-mail system asking you to click in favor of health care, do not do so unless or until you know it has a clear public option. Do not send money unless or until the White House makes clear its support for a public option. This isn't just Obama's test. It's our test. Dean Baker Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, recently drove home the point that private insurance companies cannot compete with government sponsored health insurance: If the insurers ever had to compete with a publicly run insurance plan on a level playing field, they would be blown out of the water. We know that private insurers can’t compete because we already had this experiment with the Medicare program. When private insurers had to compete on a level playing field with the traditional government-run plan they were almost driven from the market. That is why they got their friends in Congress to pass Medicare Advantage. This program spreads the wealth around by giving the private insurers a subsidy… Then he summarizes what will happen if Congress enacts “health reform” without a public health option: The fight is over whether Congress will leave in place structures that will siphon an ever-larger amount of money out of taxpayers’ pockets and put this money in the hands of the insurance industry, the hospitals, the drug companies and the doctors… Unless Congress creates a serious public plan, you can expect to be hit with the largest tax increase in the history of the world – all of it going into the pockets of the health care industry. The editorial board at The Nation magazine I’m not certain that The Nation has economists on their editorial board, but in my experience their opinions are almost always right on target no matter what the subject. In their most recent editorial they expressed their hopes for health care reform in an editorial titled “By any Means Necessary”. We hope the president, his Congressional allies and millions of Americans will be inspired to honor and do battle for Kennedy's lifelong cause. Surely Obama knows that the Senate's fighting liberal would not have put the fate of the nation's healthcare into the hands of private insurance companies, which increase their quarterly earnings by denying people care. Reform is not possible without a public alternative to the private companies, one based on coverage for all and quality care rather than profit… Like so many other progressives, they speak of the folly of “bipartisanhip” in today’s political climate: Obama often speaks of his desire to get beyond the partisan divide, but what good is bipartisanship at this moment? The Republican Party… does not simply want to criticize or modify Democratic healthcare proposals. It is determined to cripple or kill reform, and with it Obama's presidency… It's high time for Obama to part ways with the Party of No, which has been stoking outlandish fears about government "death panels" and "socialism" … And they speak of the folly of enacting health “reform” legislation without a public health option: If the Dems put forth a watered-down "bipartisan" bill with no public option, they will be justly blamed for its inevitable failure – and will see ugly results in the 2010 midterm elections. If, on the other hand, Republicans manage to defeat a good bill, let them try to explain themselves to midterm voters, who will still be at the mercy of Big Insurance and Big Pharma. This is what the American people voted in Democrats for in 2006 and 2008 Our elected representatives in Congress – and President Obama – should not lose sight of the fact that the American people elected them in large part to enact meaningful health care reform. Presidential candidate Obama promised a strong public health option plan, and he spelled out the specifics of that plan in great detail on his website during his presidential run. That plan is no longer described on his website. But during the 2008 presidential race I summarized it in posts that specifically and very favorably compared it to John McCain’s non-plan. If our President and Congress back away from this now, that would represent a betrayal of the American people who voted them into office, in my opinion. I heard David Gregory disingenuously claim on Meet the Press this morning that the American people do not support “Obama’s plan” for a public health option, citing an inappropriately worded poll as his evidence. After millions of dollars of private insurance company money have been used – with the help of our corporate news media – to misinform the American people about the “Obama plan” and its associated “death panels”, it’s no wonder that a slim majority of American’s don’t support the “Obama plan”. That does not negate the fact that Americans have consistently demonstrated widespread support (more than 75%) for a health insurance plan that includes a “choice of both a public plan administered by the federal government and a private plan for their health insurance”. The editorial in “The Nation” (that I quoted above) that proclaims the need for a public health insurance option concludes with the following warning and tribute to Ted Kennedy: Every so often in American history a window to change opens… If Obama gives up this fight and caves in to lobbyists – and if Congressional Democrats and the grassroots fail to deliver the support he needs – that window will slam shut, and with it the chance for reform, which might not come for another generation. That would be a tragedy – and no way to honor the Lion of the Senate. |
The Unfulfilled Promise
The Unfulfilled Promise of the American Dream: The Widening Gap between the Reality of the United States and its Highest Ideals  Time for change  Notwithstanding the lofty sentiments and purpose of the U.S. Declaration of Independence, the reality of the United States of America did not then – and never has – lived up to its ideal. Our nation remains today a long way from fulfilling the promise implied by those ideals. Yet, our Declaration was a great start, and it has long shone as a beacon of hope for people all over the world. Throughout our history, while many have striven to close the gap between our highest ideals and the reality of our nation, others have focused on the accumulation of private wealth and power, at the expense of everyone else. In recent decades the latter have gained much ground, leading to increasing imperialism abroad and deteriorating democracy at home, characterized by routine (and legal) bribery of our public officials, the fusion of government and private corporate interests (corporatocracy), a corrupt election system largely in the hands of private corporations, a corporate controlled communications media, and the widespread acceptance of Executive Branch secrecy, routinely justified with little if any questioning, by the magic words “national security”. All of this is rapidly turning our country from the democracy proclaimed at our founding into a plutocracy (government by the wealthy and for the wealthy). The result is the most obscene wealth gap our country has ever known, the highest imprisonment rate in the world, rampant militarism, routine flaunting of international law, the least efficient health care system in the developed world, a pending environmental catastrophe that threatens to destroy the life sustaining forces of our planet, and myriad other problems that threaten to destroy our nation and tyrannize our people. My new book, The Unfulfilled Promise of the American Dream – The Widening Gap between the Reality of the United States and its Highest Ideals, explores the roots and consequences of the demise of our democracy, and why most Americans have been unable to understand this process or even become aware of it. A good understanding of why and how we have deviated so greatly from the ideals of our nation is the first and necessary step towards getting back on the right track and revitalizing our society. The book is currently being sold in electronic PDF format and can be purchased at http://www.unfulfilledpromise.com/Buy-the-... for $3.99. It will also soon be available in Amazon Kindle format. DU members who cannot afford to buy the book but would like to read it can pm me with your e-mail address, and I will send you a free PDF copy. I’ve previously posted on DU a slightly earlier version of the introduction to the book, which is also posted at my site. Here is the Table of Contents, followed by a brief description of the three parts of the book: TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Acknowledgements Prologue – What is Wrong with the United States of America? Part I – Root Causes of the Impending Demise of American Democracy Chapter 1 – Legalized Bribery Chapter 2 – Human Psychological Factors Chapter 3 – Corporatocracy Chapter 4 – Corporate Control of Media Chapter 5 – Corrupt Election System Chapter 6 – Government Secrecy Chapter 7 – American Exceptionalism Part II – A Sampling of Imperialist Actions Chapter 8 – Slavery and its Legacy Chapter 9 – Early U.S. Imperialism Chapter 10 – U.S. Imperialism in Cold War Chapter 11 – Iraq War and Occupation Chapter 12 – Afghanistan War Part III – Consequences Chapter 13 – Election of George W. Bush Chapter 14 – War and Imperialism Chapter 15 – Class Warfare Chapter 16 – Predator Financial Class Chapter 17 – Shock Therapy Chapter 18 – Contempt for Int. Law Chapter 19 – The “War on Drugs” Chapter 20 – Climate Change Chapter 21 – “War on Terror” Chapter 22 – Health Care Chapter 23 – Unaccountable government Chapter 24 – Response to 9/11 Attacks Epilogue PART I – Root Causes of the Impending Demise of American Democracy It is somewhat difficult to separate the causes of our problems from their consequences, since they combine to form a long chain of cause leading to consequence, leading to more consequences, etcetera. Nevertheless, it seems worth while to identify the root causes of our problems, those that occur early in the chain and lead to so many of the tragic consequences we see today. The only chance we have of reversing the demise of our democracy is through addressing and attacking its root causes. At the top of the list is the systematic bribery of public officials by the powerful corporations (Chapter 1) whom our government is charged with regulating in the public interest. Instead of calling it bribery, we call it “campaign contributions”, but what we call it isn’t as important as what it is. It is hard to fathom how democracy can survive when such a practice is legal and condoned. Working in tandem with our system of legalized bribery is the nature of the people who inhabit our country. That is not to say that Americans are inherently substantially different than any other people. Human beings are imperfect, and that is probably a major reason why in a world where civilization began more than five millennia ago, the oldest written national framework of government in the world today – the Constitution of the United States of America – is only a little more than two and a quarter centuries old. Chapter 2 explores the roles of basic human needs, authoritarianism, psychological defense mechanisms used to prevent us from perceiving reality as it is rather than as we’d like it to be, and corrupted ideologies in causing us to passively accept the accumulation of power in the hands of ambitious and ruthless individuals who care about little else than expanding their own wealth and power. When bribery of public officials is tolerated as an inevitable aspect of public life, government inevitably grows close to the wealthy interests that shower it with money in return for legislative and other favors. A malevolent symbiosis grows between the state and corporate power, resulting in rule by an oligarchy that is highly detrimental to the lives of ordinary people (Chapter 3). Using their accumulated wealth and power to manipulate our legislative process, the oligarchy grabs for more and more control of the communications media (Chapter 4) that are used to control the information available to and shape the attitudes of our nation’s people, in pursuit of their own narrow interests. Since the 1980s an orchestrated campaign has been underway to demonize “big government”, thereby paving the way for private corporate control over more and more functions that were previously deemed intrinsic functions of government. Among those functions is the running of public elections (Chapter 5) – the function that symbolizes democracy perhaps more than any other single function. Consequently, the purging of selected registered voters from our computerized voter rolls has become a routine recurring event throughout much of our country, and without a doubt determined the results of the 2000 – and probably 2004 as well – presidential election. Just as bad, more and more of the counting of votes in our public elections have been turned over to private corporations, which count our votes using electronic machines using secret software to produce vote counts that cannot be verified by anyone. Bribery, the fusion of government and private interest, fake and biased news, and corrupt elections are not things that government and its corporate allies want us to know about. Consequently, they construct walls of secrecy (Chapter 6) to keep us from obtaining information that sheds light on their activities. The perfect phrase for facilitating this is “national security”. When our government tells us that the “national security” requires that certain things be kept secret from us, the understanding is that to question such a pronouncement is unpatriotic, and to actually attempt to obtain the “secret” information may be treasonous. But indefinitely maintaining secrets from the American people can be very difficult, because at least some people want to know what their government is up to. So in addition to the formal mechanisms of secrecy, informal mechanisms are constructed (Chapter 7) to keep vital information away from us. One of the primary methods for doing this is to make certain sensitive subjects taboo – that is, to create the widespread belief that discussion of these topics is so outside the bounds of acceptable human discourse that anyone who discusses them should be shunned by society, or worse. The most common issue that falls into this category is any discussion that sheds light on the disparity between American ideals and the reality of life in our country today. PART II – A Sampling of Imperialist Actions in U.S. History Notwithstanding the fact that our founding document says that “all men are created equal” and speaks of the inalienable rights of humankind, the United States has throughout its history partaken of massive exploitation of other peoples. It is estimated that at the time of our birth, 18% of our population was black slaves. In our expansion westwards during the late 18th and 19th centuries, we decimated the original inhabitants of our continent, and often treated them with great cruelty. In 1846 we manufactured an excuse for war with our neighbor Mexico, in which we continued to expand our country westwards and southwards. In 1893 we began our overseas imperialism with the conquest of Hawaii. Our overseas expansion was greatly accelerated in 1898 with our participation in the Spanish-American War, which led to our conquest of Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines. With our arrival at world superpower status at the end of World War II, we began the Cold War, which led to and served as a rationalization for covert and/or direct military actions against myriad foreign nations over the next 46 years. With the September 11, 2001 attacks on our country, we declared a perpetual “War on Terror”, which served and continues to serve as an excuse to invade and occupy Iraq and Afghanistan, nations that posed no threat to us. We do not know when or if this perpetual war will ever end. We don’t know how many additional imperial conquests it will lead to. Most Americans don’t think much about all this. Many of these actions are done in secrecy, and the American people don’t find out about them until many years later – or we never find out about them at all. Those that we do know about are spun into the most favorable light, to make them seem benign or even noble. But these actions come at great costs: in the lives of our soldiers; in the ruined lives of the peoples of the victim countries; in trillions of dollars cost to our people and their future generations; in our international reputation; in anti-American hatred leading to terrorism; and, to our democracy itself. For how can a nation claim to believe in the inalienable rights of humankind specified in its founding document, while making a mockery of that belief in the way it treats other peoples? For that reason alone it is worth while to take a brief look at our long history of imperialist actions. PART III – Consequences In the Prologue I give a brief account of what I see as some of the worst and tragic consequences of the root causes that I discuss in Part I – to enable the reader to see where this book is heading. When elections of our public officials are for sale to the highest bidder… when our public officials are so addicted to the “campaign contributions” of their wealthiest constituents that they develop a symbiotic relationship with them… when our communications media are owned and controlled by an oligarchy of wealthy elites… when our citizenry lack the ability to differentiate propaganda from reality… when we allow machines provided by private corporations to count our votes using secret electronic software… then we should expect that the consequences will not be pretty or comfortable for the vast majority of our citizens. In Part III, I explore those consequences in much greater detail, in the hope that the reader will agree with me that these are very serious problems, and that they must be successfully addressed if our country is ever to fulfill the promise of its ideals, or even make progress in that direction. When enough Americans recognize our problems as problems, stripped of the gloss and spin put on them by our oligarchy, they will rise up and do something about them. Until then there will be no progress, and we are very likely to head in the direction of all the former empires of our planet, ending in chaos, widespread catastrophe, suffering, and ignominy. Profile Information Time for change
Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
The Usual Suspects
Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted
on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the
last 24 hours.  AlienGirl has passed away 16 recs : By Contrary1 My Forums
Democratic Underground forums
and groups from my "My Forums" list.
Random Journal
 Discussion Forums
Big Forums
More Forums
Today's Featured Forums
Latest Threads
The ten most recent threads posted on
the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums. 'National Review' calls on Gingrich to quit race By DainBramaged Small towns try to save vital grocery stores By DainBramaged ACLU: New Questions About Legality of Drone Strikes By No Elephants Who voted against the NDAA? By No Elephants Israel accuses Iran of bombings in India, Georgia By No Elephants Arrest after Amsterdam airport evacuated By No Elephants Big fight looms over Obama's budget proposal By No Elephants Pastor's daughter accidentally shot at church By No Elephants |
