Reading the news these past few weeks, one might get the impression that President Obama's health care push is dead in the water. Nevermind that four of five congressional committees with jurisdiction over health care legislation have already passed substantive bills. The national media, trying to find a narrative to describe why common procedural delays are killing the momentum of reform, have chosen to focus on polls showing slight drops in public support or, more recently, on the organizing efforts of conservative activists hoping to block Obama's agenda.
But right-wingers aren't the only ones making their voices heard. In downtown Chicago yesterday, an estimated 700 supporters of the Health Care for America Now coalition joined multiple Democratic political leaders from Illinois in urging members of Congress to pass health care reform this fall. "We will rally," boomed Rep. Danny Davis. "We will rally until we win!"
Gov. Pat Quinn agreed. The event's first speaker, he called health care reform "long overdue" and the "key to our economic recovery." "This is not a privilege," he added, "this is a fundamental right." Watch it:
Rep. Jan Schakowsky, one of the Congress' most ardent advocates for health care reform, called the fight over health care this August recess "a battle of biblical proportions," pitting wealthy insurance companies against the public good:
About 30 counter-protesters amassed across the street, making mild chants and holding signs (one pictured the president holding a hammer and sickle). Harold Pollack, a professor at the University of Chicago School of Social Service Administration and a contributor at The New Republic's The Treatment, talked to a few of the opponents. While he's writing up a full post for TNR's site later today (UPDATE, 11:40 am: The full link is available here), he passed along his first impressions of the assembled party over email:
Twenty or thirty counter-protesters were gathered across the street. I walked over and chatted with them. This was no Astroturf group. They were clearly concerned citizens, one carrying a sign that read: “Senator Durbin, my insurance provider didn’t pay me to protest.” [...]
I talked with one retired vet carrying a sign that read, “Drop dead, I’m not paying for your health care.” I asked what he meant by that. He said, simply, “I should not have to pay for your medical care.” I asked him if he applies that standard to Medicare. Yes he does. I asked if he therefore feels guilty using the program. “I use the VA.”
We chatted amiably, shook hands, and went our separate ways. He’s not a bad guy, though he does believe I should move to Russia.
The White House is rolling out its own grassroots effort, using its massive online infrastructure to activate the Obama's base and combat "disinformation" in the media regarding the reform package.
Perhaps they need to start by reminding folks who runs the VA system.
Comments
hsr0601 (not verified) on Wed, 08/05/2009 - 10:08
-Some say we don't have faith in government, others say, we will be forced out.-
-No Tax, No Saving, That means No Way To Reform.-
What kind of music should this reform dance to ?
U.S. health care consumers are usually one step removed from the cost because they are covered by employer-provided insurance, which might operate as a formula for a slow pace of transfer, along with the code of mandate.
And I share the opinion that unlike the insurer-friendly, baseless senate plan by 'some' members, only a 'strong' public option by this new administration will be capable of getting the premium inflation under control and saving the U.S in turbulence.
To my knowledge, a dual system tends to deliver better results than a pure single payer system. Supposedly, to be or not to be might be up to the innovations like a pay for value program, otherwise, the forthcoming start-ups may fill the void with competitive deals. The competition based on 'fair' market value would be a beauty of true capitalism, not monopoly, an objective for anti-trust.
All free states as a nation / one body, and a fundamental human right, cover all their people. The debate about a human right, or public policy
in America is puzzling them now.
Ellen Beth (not verified) on Wed, 08/05/2009 - 15:58
I'm a little confused how exactly the White House can roll out a grassroots movement. That would make it a White House movement. We should be careful not to fall into our own astroturf groups.
Josh Kalven on Wed, 08/05/2009 - 16:11
Fair point, Ellen. "Grassroots" wasn't the best descriptor there.
Chuck from Ohio (not verified) on Wed, 08/05/2009 - 17:49
We have these avid supporters for the government take over of health care, who likely haven't actually read any of the propose bills in their entirety, who keep saying we need to do this now. What is the urgency? The bill doesn't go into effect until 2013.
We have a Congressman (or Senator) who says it isn't his job to read the bills. Is that supposed to give us a warm and fuzzy feeling?
President Obama keeps saying that if we like our health insurance we will be able to keep it. For how long? One year, five years... He is already on record as saying that we need a single payer system, but that it will take a little while to get there. That is exactly what this bill does. He is lying through his teeth by not telling us the entire truth.
Exactly where in the Constitution did someone suddenly find that health care is a fundamental right for everyone and that it should be paid for by the govenment? Where is it in the Constitution that authorizes this?
And why does anyone think that the federal government can administer such a plan? Is it because they have done such a good job with Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security which are all going broke? Is it because of how well they administered the "Cash for Clunkers" giveaway?
And, if this is such a good thing, will our Representatives, Senators, and other federal employees also be using the same plan? Just like they have their own plan in place of Social Security?
This nonsense has got to stop.
Philosophe Forum on Wed, 08/05/2009 - 18:15
Federal employees have their own plan in place of Social Security??? This is news.
Federal employees receiving Social Security would disagree. The Office of Personnel Management would disagree. Anyone who knows ANYTHING about Personnel Administration would disagree.
Graduate degree optional.
ALISON, MPA
Philosophe Forum
Phillip Honda (not verified) on Wed, 08/19/2009 - 17:37
Health care reform is an intensely debated topic - while there have been some statistics that reveal that people are happy with the health care plans that they already have, these statistics are almost always skewed in favor of those who are more educated, and therefore more likely to have good employer health insurance already. After I obtained my online healthcare degree and started to work in the real world, I can see that the number of people lacking adequate health insurance far exceeds those who do not.
Jessica (not verified) on Thu, 10/08/2009 - 15:02
Interesting take on health care reform . I enjoyed watching the video. It will be interesting to see where this goes in the future.
kip on Thu, 10/29/2009 - 23:23
Collagen
Post new comment
Progress Illinois' intention is to foster community and to maintain a comfortable and constructive blogging environment. While we encourage and appreciates different points of view, we do not consider it our duty to give a voice to anybody with an opinion.
Discussion on this site is moderated. All comments submitted will be automatically held for review by the editors before posting. Your comment will not appear on the site until it has been approved.
We will not publish comments that we consider:
Please leave a name or nickname when commenting, as it makes it easier for others to respond directly.