Health Care Reform and the ‘Independent Voter’


In the health care debate:
‘Independent’ usually means ‘misinformed’

By Dr. Stephen R. Keister / The Rag Blog / October 16, 2009

As witness not of our intentions but of our conduct, we can be true or false, and the hypocrite’s crime is that he bears false witness against himself. What makes it so plausible to assume that hypocrisy is the vice of vices is that integrity can indeed exist under the cover of all other vices except this one. Only crime and the criminal, it is true, confront us with the perplexity of radical evil; however only the hypocrite is really rotten to the core. — Hannah Arendt, 1963

Last evening on MSNBC’s the Ed Show it was suggested that most “independent voters” do not appear to understand the essence of the health care debate. This statement gave me pause, for it suddenly occurred to me that I really have a very hazy perception of who those “independent voters” really are.

My first inclination is to think of a large group of citizens who are not party-affiliated but are independent thinkers. I believe that many in the educated, progressive community would have the same immediate response. Well, stop! It was largely the “independent voters” who voted against their own self interests and twice elected Ronald Reagan president. Time to slow down and reflect…

No doubt there are those who do not belong to a specific political party, or consider themselves Socialists or Greens; however, this is not the mass of the electorate. Who are we discussing?

The Democrat or Republican is moved by tradition or conviction to register as he or she does. In the health care debate most registered Democrats favor including a non-profit entity — whether it be a true non-profit company, overseen by physicians and members of the community at large (universal single payer care as described by Physicians For A National Health Program), or a government agency like Medicare or the Veterans Administration.

Most Republican champion a “free market” neo-liberal economic theory, social Darwinism, in fact dominated by the insurance cartel and pharmaceutical giants Yet this does not account for the masses of the “independent voters” alluded to on the Ed Show.

We return to the so-called independent voters, the ones who voted for Ronald Reagan. These people were not well informed, as we might delude ourselves into thinking. These were the folks who were moved to vote for an actor, an actor they had seen on the screen as a soldier, as a cowboy, or a he-man. Many, as with Reagan himself, did not divorce his roll playing from reality. They did not consider that here was a puppet managed by a number of ambitious puppet masters from the world of the corporations and the military-industrial complex, who were the powers behind the throne.

These were the folks who were unaware that their trade unions were being undermined, their financial and social safety nets were being destroyed, and their jobs were beginning to be shipped overseas to increase the profits of the large corporate interests behind the Reagan presidency.

Certainly, a few “independent” voters are at home studying political trends, reading economic theory, trying to comprehend the geo-politics of the Middle East; however, most are watching Fox News, attending Ron Paul discussion groups, seriously considering the overtly absurd, corporate sponsored, anti-health care propaganda on television.

These are the people who chose their health care companies and part D Medicare insurance carriers from ads on TV; they are totally oblivious to the fact that the cost of TV advertising is tremendous and in the long run will be passed on to the consumer who has been suckered into purchasing the product. Lost with them is the old adage that you don’t get “something for nothing.”

Unfortunately most of the “information” available to the average person is not information at all, but is misinformation provided by the corporations who control much of the print media, the preponderance of the TV stations, and nearly all radio. Yet there is a glimmering of hope. The October 12th Modern Physician reported that the American physician is much more satisfied in dealing with a government program such as Medicare than with private insurance companies. On a 1-5 scale, the 1700 physicians participating in the survey gave Medicare part B a score of 3.59, Aetna was second with a rating of 3.15, followed by Cigna 3.11, Coventry Health Care 2.99, Humana 2.92, Anthem 2.84, and United Health Care 2.45. Please note that Humana is probably the most widely advertised health insurance/hospital company on telebision!


Consumers Union, publisher of Consumers Reports, for decades, rarely makes a political statement.; however, in a Consumer Reports survey, republished by McClatchy Newspapers on October 9, showed that 51 % of Americans have “faced difficult health care choices in the past year.” The survey showed that because of costs 28% put off doctors visits; 25% have been unable to afford medical bills or medication; 22% put off medical procedures; 20% declined medical tests; 20% skipped filling prescriptions; 15% tool expired medication; 15% skipped scheduled dosages of medication. Jim Guest, Consumers Union president and CEO said, “Today health care costs too much. Many Americans are one slip or major illness away from losing their coverage.”

During the past week the insurance cartel has exposed its true face with its threat to Congress and the President that if proposed health care legislation (read “insurance reform”) is not passed to their liking that they will raise rates throughout the insurance industry. And they are demanding that congress include a mandate requiring Americans to own health insurance, with a penalty as high as $3,800 a family to enforce it. Further, the insurance industry would be delighted if Congress includes tax-payer funding of private insurance company premiums, for those who cannot afford to buy the mandated private insurance.

In other words the health insurance industry is trying to blackmail our elected representatives, at least those that who are not already bribed, to provide more income to the insurance industry on the backs of the poor and the taxpayer. Thus, higher salaries for the executives – making possible larger mansions and more elegant yachts — as well as increased income to the stockholders and the entire Wall Street establishment.

Of course this is merely the tip of the iceberg; the power structure in the United States is determined to create a two class society. This is well illustrated in an article by Mark Ames, distributed by AlterNet, entitled “8 Shocking Ways the Billionaires Have Schemed to Rob Us of Every Last $.” It is time that the “independent voters” awaken and face reality, since most of this approach is based on lack of medical care to the average citizen. Note, for example, that there is now a policy among the private insurance companies to deny health care coverage to women who have had a Caesarian section, unless she is voluntarily sterilized thereafter.

I have had Medicare coverage for the past 18 years, and have experienced no denials or other problems in spite of treatment for cancer of the prostate and and (hold your hats) an idiopathic demyelinating periperal motor neuropathy that is gradually interfering with my walking. At no time has my physicians’ treatment, testing, or prescribing been challenged. At no time has there been evidence of a government bureaucrat interjecting himself into the process, and my final death-bed wishes have been purely private between my family and myself, and those I have informed, my physician and attorney. My main concern, and this MUST be addressed by Congress, is the fact that Medicare funding will become a real problem by 2017 unless the gross waste of billions of dollars poured into the Medicare Advantage Programs or The Medicare Part D prescription programs in not halted by Congress.

We have reached the crucial stage of health care reform.

I have faith in the House of Representatives; however, I am much concerned about the Senate, with its jellyfish-like majority leader, and its antiquated parliamentary rules — with 100% of the Republican Senators, including those from Maine, as well as “independent” Sen, Lieberman, being totally beholden to the insurance industry. We also have the pre-paid group of 6-7 Democratic Senators, most a part of the Senate Finance Committee.

Unfortunately, in the face of the widely disseminated information regarding their acceptance of baksheesh, they show no shame. Only superhuman pressure from the public, including the “independents,” can alter this nearly untenable situation. It blows my mind that the United States, among all industrialized nations, citizens do not have decent, universal health care — or even the prospect of having it — as a moral imperative. Only in the USA do we see boxes in check-out lines asking donations to pay for a certain child’s brain tumor surgery. Shame, shame, shame.

I have a bit of remaining hope that the President will rise to the task of demanding a TRUE public option, Medicare-for-all. A plan parallel to the current Medicare for the elderly, paid for by premiums collected from the insured, or with government subsidy for the poor. This would not be related to the current Medicare programs which have been paid for in advance by a 3 3/4% tax deduction from participants’ paycheck throughout their working years.

The Medicare-for-all would not subject to the rationing of care as is rampant among the private insurers, there would be no denial of insurance du to pre-existing illness, and no insurance company employees would be searching through your claims to find a reason to deny payment.

To date President Obama has not shown himself to be a person of strong conviction, when we consider the failure to establish regulations subsequent to the financial crises; his deference to the military, rather than the Middle East experts, concening Afghanistan; and his blathering homage to a Republican senator from Maine, rather than taking an unequivocal position of leadership in support of a public option as the keystone of universal health care.

Once again, we as a people, must make our voices heard at the White House. Time grows very short.

[Dr. Stephen R. Keister lives in Erie, Pennsylvania. He is a retired physician whose articles on health care reform appear regularly in The Rag Blog.]

The Rag Blog

This entry was posted in Rag Bloggers and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Health Care Reform and the ‘Independent Voter’

  1. What arrogance. This is just more elitist angst from Progressives bemoaning their ineffectiveness. Don’t you guys ever get tired of thinking that you’re the smartest people on the planet?

    You assume that if you could expose or eliminate “corpratist propoganda” and “misinformation” and the smoke screen of Fox news, that all us poor simple minded folks would stop working against our own self interests, shed our blinders, lift our eyes and finally grasp your “truth”.

    Nothing could be further from the truth. Progressive arguments simply can’t stand on their own with the vast majority of Americans and this is just another in a long list of articles looking for scapegoats to blame for that reality

  2. Tom, thanks for making my point. Elitist and arrogant?? how could anyone think that.

  3. It is a sound idea–a sound ideal. Most of the other advanced countries of the world have already adopted it and their experience affords the knowledge that social insurance can be made a sound and workable project … compulsory contributory annuities in time will establish a self-supporting system for those now young and for future. Roosevelt’s Message To Congress re: report from CES, 1935.

    Payable benefits will equal scheduled benefits until the trust funds are exhausted, thereafter, they will equal the Social Security program’s annual revenues. In 2043—CBO’s projected date for the exhaustion of the trust funds—revenues will equal only 83 percent of scheduled outlays. CBO’s Long-Term Projections for Social Security: 2009 Update.

    Roosevelt thought it was a peachy idea to pass Social Security in 1935 in part because other countries were doing it. The problem isn’t with the idea or ideal of Social Security. It’s with the corruption of politicians of both stripes that make it impossible to trust them with any sort of financial management.

    Universal healthcare is a wonderful idea. In practice the US government, regardless of party in power, will muck it up and the bill will be paid by the next generations. The reality for us, higher costs and reduced benefits, just as is true for Social Security today.

    Most thinking Americans dont trust their government and are looking for ways to reduce its influence, not increase it. Why is that so hard for Progressives to understand??

  4. Fed Up says:

    Exremist said: “The problem isn’t with the idea or ideal of Social Security. It’s with the corruption of politicians of both stripes that make it impossible to trust them with any sort of financial management.”

    So, then, are we to assume you prefer the gentle kindness of health insurance corporations?

    By your own logic, you ought to be for a strong public option,so that the inherent greed and human incompetence of both government and corporations can balance one another! My, my, what a Madisonian idea that would be!

    Me, I don’t believe humans are inherently evil or greedy, so I want a single payer system, but by your own logic, you should be out there fighting for a public option.

  5. Alan L. Maki says:

    As well as being the only indutrialized country not to have some kind of socialized health care, we don’t have a socialist, labor-based political party to carry forward an agenda for real progressive health care reform.

    Barack Obama and the Democrats can’t be counted on to do anything Wall Street opposes this is why it will probably require that the “independent voters” you refer to get behind a labor-based socialist party if we are ever going to solve this health care mess.

    Short of establishing a labor-based, socialist party like the New Democratic Party in Canada, we could just tell Obama and the Democrats they won’t be getting our votes if we don’t get at least single-payer universal health care.

    What’s at issue here is “democracy” as much as health care reform because the vast majority of people repeatedly tell the politicians they want nothing less than single-payer.

    And if you give people a complete choice and include the example of VA or the Indian Health Service they will choose that.

    I find it rather ironic that the Tea baggers claim to be opposed to socialized health care yet they don’t even know what socialized health care is any more than they know what socialism really is.

  6. I like Tom Degan. Maybe not in this post, but I wish my rss worked right……………

  7. Alan,
    Paraphrasing Nike, just do it. You guys WON – You have the House, the Senate and the Apologizer in Chief. Tell Harry to nuke the single payer reform bill through the Senate and be done with it. The House will sign off, and Obama will sign it into law and you will get what you want.

    If Alan is right, then the Dems will get plenty of voter love at the polls come 2010 allowing them to pass even more nifty progressive policies in 2011-12

    According to this article’s author, the groups on my side are just oblivious tea-baggers who won’t face reality and are roided up on misinformation from our corporate masters. Each month we write a few (million) letters and make a few (million) calls, and show up with our homemade, and often misspelled, signs at a few (thousand) political events, but even so, the majority of Americans want single payer. Right? So we must be a small minority of voters and the politicians should ignore us because they know … Americans really want single payer.

    Just do it already!

  8. Fed Up says:

    Apparently, despite yourself, or perhaps not, you make a good point.

    One feels as if there is a dinosaur in the room no one is talking about, eh?

  9. Anonymous says:

    On Oct 18, 2009, at 10:46 AM, BettyTX wrote:

    This morning on Washington Journal (C-Span) they had a segment where American ex-pats were invited to call in, explain WHY they are living in another country, and comment on their health care. It was a VERY interesting segment.

    One who called in was living in Copenhagen. She said she and her husband CHOSE to retire there because the lifestyle was much simpler. She praised their healthcare. I don’t remember if it is more like the U.K. or Canada, but she liked it. Peter (?) asked her if she didn’t pay really high taxes. She said WORKING people pay high taxes but she doesn’t work. She and her husband draw pensions, so they don’t pay taxes.

    Another was living BY CHOICE in the U.K. He said that, yes, their system had become sort of overwhelmed, but he said it is much improved since they have raised taxes somewhat. He said he still prefers it to what we have in the U.S.

    Another was a lady who had married a Brit, so she is also living in the U.K. She was a younger person and she LIKED the system they have there.

    I *think* there was also one in Scotland. I don’t remember the others, but ALL liked their system better than ours. They all seemed somewhat puzzled that people in the U.S. would so fear their own government.

    I suspect that segment is viewable on C-Span’s web page via streaming video, but I haven’t looked. (Now I’ll copy and go paste this message in the Rag Blog comments.)

    Betty in TX

  10. Anonymous says:

    Extremist to the DHS

    If you can get your head out from under your a** and wipe away that Fox News induced haze of ignorance, perhaps you could read Alan Maki’s post again.

    You mention that “you guys won so…..” which means that you did not comprehend Mr Maki’s words or point.

    Alan Maki is making the correct point of a need for a political party completely independent from the pro-war, corporate corrupted Democrats or Republicans. As neither one of those parties represent the ordinary working people of the United States.

    After all, that is how they did it in Canada. With the UFCW, Tommy Douglas and the NDP.

  11. Anonymous, it’s always great to hear from my classy and thoughtful progressive friends. To make it even more impressive, you took your swipe at me anonymously. How brave of you.

    I am sorry about the “you guys won” crack. It’s just that the level of whining from Progressives never seems to abate, even with one of the most left leaning administrations in power. You are a tough crowd and Obama seems to be figuring that out.

    I think ya’ll should go ahead and form your own political party. Splitting votes and money with the Democrats would make it so much easier for conservatives to enhance and maintain their political power. I recall hearing recently about the Working Families Party in the Northeast that doesn’t even need people to vote for them, they just make up their own votes. Maybe you could just take over that party?

  12. Richard says:

    Geez, I can’t agree with any one of these commets or the article. I want universal health care, (not insurance) for everyone paid out of the public weal. No one is offering that so…

    BTW WHERE IS RICHARD JENN.

  13. Quote from this article:
    I have a bit of remaining hope that the President will rise to the task of demanding a TRUE public option, Medicare-for-all …
    The Medicare-for-all would not subject to the
    rationing of care as is rampant among the private insurers, there would be no denial of insurance due to pre-existing illness, and no insurance company employees would be searching through your claims to find a reason to deny payment.

    Quote from Donald Berwick, Obama’s new head of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services:
    “The decision is not whether or not we will ration care — the decision is whether we will ration with our eyes open.”

    Dr Keister, would you care to admit how wrong you and most of your fellow rag bloggers were, now that it has been proven beyond a doubt that your analysis was wrong?

    Progressives are great at predictions, but no where to be found when their rose-colored-glasses analysis falls flat.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.