Rewriting Conservatives for Patients' Rights' Script
Published March 03, 2009 @ 05:09PM PT
Surely you would have guessed the first anti-health care reform spots would come from PhRMA, who warned that they would spend millions of dollars to convince President Obama to leave the pharmaceutical industry alone. Maybe, maybe it would have been from American Health Insurance Plans, if Obama had begun aggressively pushing the public competitor as a non-negotiable part of his plan. Also possible, but unlikely, would have been the Chamber of Commerce or even the RNC. Nope. Instead it's Conservatives for Patients' Rights, a group you've never heard of - because they're brand new.
It also seems like they need a little help with their scripts!
For one thing, they're trying to revive old ghost tales about health care reform - which makes sense, I suppose, since their spokesperson is former Columbia/HCA Healthcare CEO Richard Scott, himself an old health care ghost from a system gone bad. I'd recommend Ezra Klein's write-up, where he recounts that, "When all was said and done, HCA agreed to pay the government $1.7 billion. It was the largest fraud settlement in U.S. history. Richard Scott, the CEO, was forced to resign in shame." Or you can read Jonathan Cohn's, where he says Scott "is emblematic of everything that's frequently wrong with corporate, for-profit medicine." Or Maggie Mahar's, where she recounts how bad things got at Scott's hospitals for staff and patients, and how "the investigation revealed that the hospital chain had been bilking Medicare while simultaneously handing over kickbacks and perks to physicians who steered patients to its hospitals."
Or you can just go with my appraisal of Mr. Scott, borrowed liberally from Bugs Bunny: "What an ultra-maroon! What a nincompoop!"
Because really, folks, if you're going to try to follow in the footsteps of the infamous Harry and Louise ads or Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (note: same PR firm! Glad to see those guys are still getting work... not), you should try to, you know, NOT MAKE YOUR PRINCIPLES EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE OBAMA PLAN YOU'RE TRYING TO FIGHT AGAINST! Contrast, people, contrast!
Here's my rewrite of the TV spot to highlight the absurdity:
With Congress starting on health care, let's remind politicians Americans know what works. After all, according to Kaiser Family Foundation's tracking poll, 62% of Americans say we should tackle health care reform this year! Wait, forget I said that part.
Choice - that means choosing your own doctor rather than being limited to doctors that are in-network, having a high deductible plan that doesn't cover non-emergency doctor visits, or being uninsured and unable to see any doctor whatsoever. Also, having a choice between public coverage or private insurance. Or just having a choice other than "whatever my employer gives me, even though the premiums have gone up every year."
Competition - disclose prices and performance up front, similar to how Medicare does it, but largely unlike private insurance who will keep you guessing on the rates, whether the procedure will be approved, and whether you'll be charged later by the doctor for going out-of-network based on faulty information. Also, a comprehensive standard benefits package as good as members of Congress get, so you're comparing like to like when looking at the prices for plans. Finally, a National Health Exchange with public and private options, so those guys can really go at it to provide you the best deal.
Accountability - to give you the same tax breaks for insurance employers get. Or, as Sen. Max Baucus is indicating, just take those tax breaks away from employers (problem solved!) And by accountability, I absolutely do not mean doing some research to determine if all of these procedures and fancy drugs actually make you better. Finally, accountability means being able to fire your health insurance company if they tick you off.
And Personal Responsibility - reward healthy choices, like getting primary and preventative care, using a smoking cessation program to live a healthier lifestyle, and not holding off on getting care because you're worried about skyrocketing costs, as 53% of Americans did this year.
Let's have real reform, that puts patients over profits. Unlike at my hospitals. Because I care about patients now, possibly for the first time. It's a bold new century, people.
Conservative for Patients' Rights - defending YOUR RIGHT to choose the ability to get quality, affordable health care, rather than the dysfunctional status quo... oh right, you did choose already, didn't you? Back in November 2008.
Yeah, see, now that's a little better. Not quite enough about how it's necessary to cut costs for everybody in tough economic times, or how acting now prevents a future catastrophe for federal and state budgets, but you get the idea.
I'm Tim Foley, and I approve this message.
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
EmailRelated Posts
-
Insurance Companies Are Cutting Their OWN Benefits: The Best of the Weekend
-
Making the Opposition to Reform a Punchline
-
Rep. Grayson and the Face of Uncompromising Reform
Comments (12)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Author
-
Tim has been an online organizer and blogger on health care policy for the Obama for America campaign (during the primaries) and currently for the Committee of Interns and Residents/SEIU Healthcare, a labor union for intern and resident doctors. Views expressed here are Tim's, and don't represent the positions of CIR or SEIU.
Top Health Care Actions
-
-
-
Pass Health Reform Now!
479 People
-
Pass Health Reform Now!
Here's a link to the crumbs at Conservatives for Patients Rights.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Zt1qD8E7As&eurl=http://www.conservativesforpatientsrights.com/
Posted by Martin Bring on 03/03/2009 @ 07:28PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Thanks, Martin. The Brightcove version wasn't quite working for me
Posted by Timothy Foley on 03/03/2009 @ 07:33PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
HOOT. I approve it too Tim. Nice piece.
Posted by Lee Dorsey on 03/04/2009 @ 10:59PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
We're certainly not running out of apologists for government run health care. Here's something to consider. Look at how well the Soviet Union worked. See how many Cubans have fled Castro's workers' paradise in Cuba. Read how the communist Chinese are abandoning state controlled economy for free market capitalism. It is a sad and sorry state of affairs that American education has brainwashed two generations of Americans into being ignorant of their country's history, economic success, and societal values. With recent historical evidence of the failure of state run economies as glaring examples, the notions propagated by fools and liars like Michael Moore have become common place talking points. Moore is a man from a working class background who has made MILLIONS through the free market economy, who claims with a straight face, that healthcare in Cuba, is superior to that in the U.S. The distraction about the cost of health insurance, is a ruse to ignore the evidence of rationed health care in Europe, Cuba, Canada, ad infinitum. The reality is that ANY person who goes into a hospital WILL BE CARED FOR. That just doesn't happen when waiting lists, and rationing is placed in the hands of bureaucrats. A society that uses semantics to disguise the killing of its most innocent citizens as a "right" of another person, has crossed the Rubicon. Euthanizing the elderly or denying treatment, as a utilitarian cost-cutting method, is how your government will solve not only the "health care issue", but will make Social Security solvent. Wake up folks. You've bought into a lunacy that has nothing but tragic endings for each of us. The cost of health insurance pales in comparison to the cost of stupidity.
Posted by Mike Mattson on 03/21/2009 @ 08:51AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
It's a choice Mike. In the Soviet Union, you had no choice. You can still choose to keep you current plan. You can still buy health insurance. You would have the opportunity to buy the same plan that your congressman has.
Posted by michael phillips on 05/13/2009 @ 08:25AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
The truth is no one in Canada is interested in going to the US for treatment. We get treatment in Canada. Only 2% of Canadians prefer the US system to the one we have.
People who have urgent matters are treated RGHT AWAY. My mother at age 72 had bypass surgery in within 3 days, and only that long because they had to stabilized her for a time so she would survive the surgery. I've had four surgeries myself. Serious but not urgent ones in 4 days and 6 days. Not serious ones in 10 days and 16 days. This is what it REALLy is like in Canada and FAR more Americans come to Canada for medical reasons than there are Canadian going to the US.
In the US you have heavily rationed care and long waiting lists. Rationing is what you call lack of insurance and insurance denial and recission. Waiting lists are what you call insurance company approval, which can be a wait of two or three months. We get surgery and treatment in Canada MUCH faster than most Americans get insurance company approval.
Your view of the Canadian health care system is exteremely faulty. We have a far better system for both access (universal) and quality than Americans have.
Posted by John Murphy on 10/10/2009 @ 12:15AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
One more thing for you to think about:
I have exactly the same access and quality of health care as the Premier of my Province and my Member of Parliament.
I doubt very much that you have anywhere near the same health care as the Governor of your State and your Senators.
Posted by John Murphy on 10/10/2009 @ 12:21AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
In Canada the government pays for for ALL primary physicians, ALL specialists, and ALL hospital tests, procedures, and surgery. There is NO ONE between me and my physician. If my physicians says I need a CT Scan I get it no need for approval from anyone else.
In the US, you have an insurance company bureaucrat between you and your physician, and it's the insurance company bureaucrat who decides what treatment you get, not your physician.
In Canada, we would nevr tollerate anyone between our physicians and us. The anti reform movement in the US must prefer to have insurance company bureaucrats between them and their physicians, rationing their care for profit. We would never stand for that in Canada.
Posted by John Murphy on 10/10/2009 @ 12:37AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Yet one more thing, Mike, sorry to burst your biased bubble, but no one is euthanized here, far from it.
As I said before, my mother had bypass surgery at age 72, and I had my last surgery four months ago at age 60, it wasn't serious, I had it within 16 days.
12,000 hip replacements were done last year in Canada on people who were 85 years of age or older.
Where is your fictitious euthanasia all this, huh Mike?
Posted by John Murphy on 10/10/2009 @ 12:45AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Mike Mattson: "The reality is that ANY person who goes into a hospital WILL BE CARED FOR."
If that's the case, why does anybody bother to buy health insurance?
I assure you, the rising cost of healthcare is not a ruse.. As for rationing, no OECD nation does more of it than the United States.
No one here is arguing against the efficiencies of the private sector to do most things. Nevertheless, there are some things done better by the public sector.. Many of us at Change.org believe that universal health insurance would be one of them. Many others, including President Obama, want a public competitor to help insure the 48 million American citizens who either cannot afford health insurance or represent too great a risk to the insurance companies.
Posted by Martin Bring on 03/21/2009 @ 06:31PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Why is the health insurance industry afraid of a little competition from the government ? If the health insurance plan is a better plan, let the free market decide. You will still have the right to choose a private plan, if that is what you want. The government plan would be a choice for you to make, not mandated. Choice is good , right?
Posted by michael phillips on 05/13/2009 @ 08:20AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
The very thought that there is profit to be made from someones illness is repugnant to me. Our health care should be provided by our government and paid for through taxation. It is a moral issue. The health care industry is just that, an industry. The only reason insurance companies exist is to make money for their investors. Whether we pay for health care insurance with taxes or by purchasing it from an insurance company we still have to pay for it. It only makes sense that the cost to us will be less if there is no company having to make profits. My own health insurance premium (of which my employer pays a portion but I don't know how much) has gone from costing me $201.58 per month in November 2008 to $251.90 in July of 2009. This money is deducted from my paycheck so the insurance company gets paid no matter what. I just wish my income had increased by that much. It has not. In fact, like most Americans, my income has decreased. But the insurance companies get an increase in income while I get a decrease.
William Robards
Posted by William Robards on 08/06/2009 @ 02:25PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.