Demagoguery at its worst: Republicans versus Health Care for the Less Fortunate

By Brigitte L. Nacos

The best cartoons, more than best laid words, get to the truth in politics und elsewhere. That’s certainly the case with a cartoon by Mike Peters in the Dayton Daily News that imagined the threefold gospel in case Jesus returned as Glenn Beck: “Don’t Heal the Sick, That’s Socialism; Don’t Shelter the Homeless, That’s Communism; Don’t Feed the Hungry, That’s Nazism.” Problem is that the cartoon is not overdrawn to drive political reality home--the despicable clown of Fox News is not a laughing matter. His and the demagoguery of like-minded fanatics has not only incited the so-called tea party movement but, by now, the mainstream of the Republican Party as the endgame in the long struggle for a very modest health care reform demonstrated.

On Sunday, before the House voted by a small margin for the Senate version of the health care bill without a single Republican vote, a Republican screamed “baby killer” as pro-life Democratic Representative Bart Stupak asked fellow Democrats to vote against a Republican amendment on abortion services. No protest came from the Republican side of the aisle. Obviously, Republicans are now okay with the rhetoric of the most extremist pro-life wing that glorifies anti-abortion terrorism—the killing of providers of legal abortion.

A day earlier, Republican member of the House incited openly an already out of hand crowd of fanatic protesters against the health care reform. As Politico reported,

“Republican Reps. Tom Latham of Iowa, Jo Ann Emerson of Missouri, Brett Guthrie of Kentucky and Gregg Harper of Mississippi stood on south balcony off the House floor — an area known informally as "the beach" — holding pieces of paper that read "kill the bill" to a group of cheering protesters. Some Republican lawmakers waved a "Don't Tread on Me" flag from the balcony, causing the crowd to go wild. Later in the day, Reps. Steve King, Paul Ryan and others gave the crowd an Evita’s welcome, before gathering together to spell out a “Kill the bill” with individual letter signs.”

The tea party crowd hurled the “n” word towards black representatives and the “f” word, a gay epithet, towards Barney Frank who characterized the atmosphere as “mass hysteria.” Indeed, mobilized by front organizations for the insurance industry, the rank and file members of the tea party movement and the Republican Party have been duped into rowdy protests or less visible opposition for the benefit of greedy insurers with discriminatory policies against sick people. They should remember that these insurers do not ask your party affiliation or your ideological preference when they discriminate against you in case of serious illness. 

Unfortunately, too many Independents and even Democrats have been deceived by the demagogues as well—a perfect situation for Republicans to further exploit polarization during the upcoming campaigns before this fall’s mid-term elections. Rarely, in modern history, has the country experienced a similar partisan polarization. It is entirely possible that the Democratic Party pays a heavy price in the congressional election this year and the presidential election of 2012.

The question is whether the reform as it stands now was worthwhile voting for regardless of the political consequences.While at best a modest step in the direction of comprehensive health care reform, a few good prospects stand out:

First, providing millions of people with health insurance so that up to 95% or so Americans will be  assured proper health care within a few years.

Second, pre-existing conditions will not longer exclude people from health insurance or ask them to pay extra high rates that many cannot afford.

Third, insured parents will be able to pay a modest extra fee to keep children up to 26 years of age insured.

As adopted now, there are terrible shortfalls here as well. Most of all, the massive lobbying campaign of the large drug companies won another victory in that the government cannot negotiate lower prices for Medicare recipients nor will it be legal to import the same prescription drugs that are significantly cheaper abroad. Also, unfortunately, the Bush administration’s initiative of pushing Medicare recipients into the arms of private insurers for expensive “advantage” and prescription drug insurances seems to remain in place.

Calling any of this a government take-over of the health care system or equating it with socialism or worse is either part of the well-financed “patriotic” campaign by special interests that demagogues of the tea party movement and Republican Party readily bought into or a case of completely clueless people who have no idea about the state of health care in comparable liberal democracies. 

Comments

[Tony Facade]

Hello Dr Nacos, can you characterize the attacks on Dems who voted for the health care bill as terrorism? If not, why not?
Thanks,
Tony

[Brigitte Nacos]

Hi, Tony: I wondered what happened to you and missed your always most interesting and important comments.
As for the attacks on Democrats who voted for the health care reform bill, I surely call this terrorism since by definition is violence for political reasons and ends. Moreover, the heated rhetoric of legislators on the oppositional side has surely contributed to embolden the extremist right-wing fringe of the militia/patriot variety.
Take a look at these links, first a Washington Post article of a former militia guy--now worse:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/25/AR2010032501722.html?hpid=topnews

then, this guy's web site:
http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/

And this in 21st century America...
Brigitte

[Tony Facade]

Thanks for your response. I would expect the relevant agencies to prosecute the offenders as thoroughly as other terrorists have been, lest we blur the definitions and make allowances based on religious or culutral affiliations. Consistency means a lot in a country claiming "rule of law."