Dear Tea Party: This Is What America Stands For

[Neil D]

Dear Tea Party: This Is What America Stands For

A message to the new believers in our country's "can't-do" spirit, and a history lesson for the eve of health care reform

By John H. Richardson

Read more: http://www.esquire.com/the-side/richards...s#ixzz0iOz2MjnW

One of far too many familiar scenes from Tuesday's "CODE RED" protest in Washington.

Let's review, shall we?

1. The deficit is huge and frightening, sparking a national movement called "tea parties" that protest "big government."

2. Health care reform will reduce the deficit by about $116 billion dollars in just the next ten years, according to the Congressional Budget Office, which produces the numbers on which both parties rely. It will also insure more than 30 million people and stop insurance companies from refusing insurance to people who are or might be sick.

3. If we don't pass health care reform, things will get much, much worse — by 2030, for example, Medicare and Medicaid alone will eat up one-third of the entire budget. That means revolutionary changes, folks. This article from the Center for American Progress lays out the options with admirable clarity: "In order to get to a balanced budget in 2025 without health care reform, all other federal spending would have to be reduced by 56 percent. That means Social Security benefits would need to be cut in half, as would spending on national defense, on veterans' benefits, on homeland security, on education, and on everything else."

Those are the facts. The people who are suspicious about big government and big business — I'm talking to you, Tea Parties of America — need to wake up. You are being manipulated by powerful people who don't give a damn about the long-term welfare of this country. Right now, millions and millions of dollars are being spent by propaganda groups that want to confuse you. Don't be suckers.

Here's another lie that we are being fed these days: the idea that the real America is a place where freedom is the only value, where each rugged individual should rely on himself alone. This is the idea behind the cries of socialism. It is the idea behind the claims that the American Constitution gives the government no authority to regulate health care, an argument that has spread from fringe revolutionaries in the "Patriot" militias to the Wall Street Journal. It is the idea behind Glenn Beck's spectacularly bizarre attack on Christianity itself last week, when he told his viewers that the words "social justice" were code for communism and Nazism — never mind all that corny stuff in the Bible like "what you have done for the least of my brethren, you have done it for me" and "one who is gracious to the poor man lends to the Lord."

But in fact, selfishness is not the American Way, and never has been. Way back in colonial times, Americans spent between "10 and 35 percent of all municipal funds" on what was then called "relief," according to Walter I. Trattner's standard textbook on the subject, From Poor Law to Welfare State: A History of Social Welfare in America. Aid to the poor and sick was the largest single government expense, providing crucial sustenance to the widows and orphans of the Indian wars, the survivors of epidemics, starving immigrants, and a surprising number of abandoned bastard children (during the Revolutionary era, between a third and 50 percent of all first children were illegitimate — take that, nostalgists of family values!). Prodded by the spiritual zeal of the Great Awakening and Enlightenment ideas about progress, the years leading up to our revolution were celebrated as an age of both public and private humanitarianism, a spirit captured in this letter General George Washington wrote to his estate manager in 1775: "Let the hospitality of the house, with respect to the poor, be kept up. Let no man go away hungry."

The American Revolution only intensified these generous sentiments, Trattner explains:

The Declaration of Independence, with its emphasis upon reason and human equality, naturally tended to call attention to the need to improve the common person's lot. Independence in the New World, where resources were abundant, offered Americans the opportunity, if not the obligation, to root out old errors and vices and erect a society which would be a beacon to the world. At the very least, if the independent republican and democratic rule were to endure, American citizens had to be exempt from such impediments as illiteracy, poverty and distress to cast their ballots freely and rationally.

As the "can-do" spirit set the nation on fire to build that shining city on the hill, the state "became an instrument for advancing the welfare of the entire population." Government offices like the Committee on the Superintendents of the Poor were established to care for the blind, the deaf, and the mentally ill.

There were countervailing forces, to be sure. The opening of the frontier encouraged the lone-cowboy individualism that still inspires so many Americans. The rise of Adam Smith's ideas about capitalism's invisible hand had a big impact, kicking off the much-too-convenient idea that "greed is good." So did Malthusian ideas about overpopulation, which got mixed up with Enlightenment ideas about the perfectibility of human nature in a particularly toxic way — since suffering wasn't seen as part of God's plan anymore, people convinced themselves that the poor were poor because they lacked moral character and therefore didn't deserve compassion. An American disciple of Smith named Nathaniel Ware made the argument succinctly: "Humanity aside, it would be best interest of society to kill all such drones."

(Just last month, the Lt. Governor of South Carolina, a Republican named Andre Bauer, said much the same during a discussion of food stamps and public housing: "My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed.'")

In the 1820s, Americans began an experiment with "indoor relief" — building poorhouses. But as the idea that the poor deserved to suffer took hold made it easier for people to argue against the taxes that were necessary to support them, so they quickly became as ugly as anything in the work of Charles Dickens. Here's how the New York State legislature summed it up in a report released during the 1850s:

It is much to be regretted that our citizens manifest so little interest in the condition even of those in their immediate neighborhood. Individuals who take great interest in human suffering whenever it is brought to their notice, never visit them, and are entirely uninformed, that in a county house almost at their own doors, may be found the lunatic suffering for years in a dark and suffocating cell in summer, and almost freezing the winter — where a score of children are poorly fed, poorly clothed, and quite untaught — where the poor idiot is half starved and beaten with rods because he is too dull to do his master's bidding — where the aged mother is lying in perhaps her last sickness, unattended by a physician, and with no one to minister to her wants — where the lunatic, and that lunatic too, a woman, is made to feel the lash in the hands of a brutal underkeeper yet these are all to be found — they all exist in our State.'"

This is where the glories of self-reliance and rugged individualism reveal their dark side. Widows and orphans could be expected to work for their bread, perhaps, but no fair-minded person could expect the mentally ill to raise themselves up by their own bootstraps. Yet for many of them, the poorhouses were a step up — all across America, "idiots" were kept in cages, chained to posts and beaten into obedience. And so it came to pass that in the years before the Civil War the great and brave Dorothea Dix began her solitary campaign to create federally funded state mental institutions, traveling 60,000 miles through the United States alone to visit the prisons, almshouses and asylums of the nation. After years of effort, both houses of Congress finally passed a bill to fund the state mental hospitals in 1854 — a bill that was immediately vetoed by President Franklin Pierce.

His argument? Get ready for some déjà vu, my friends: It was unconstitutional to help the poor. "I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for making the Federal Government the great almoner of public charity throughout the United States."

Pierce was a "strict constructionist," just like the Tea Party Republicans, Federalists, and libertarians we hear so much from today. He was also a feckless drunk who was trying to appease the states' rights fans in the South and later came out in support of the Confederacy, and he's generally considered one of the least effective presidents in American history — the founder of the "can't-do" spirit that has seized so much of our country today.

This week, Congress has a chance to honor Pierce's legacy — or to repudiate him and all his mingy and selfish and fearful heirs, and go back to building that shining city on the hill.

Thoughts on the countdown to HCR? Tips? More obscure history textbooks? Click here to e-mail John H. Richardson about his weekly political column at Esquire.com.

Read more: http://www.esquire.com/the-side/richards...s#ixzz0iOyhjyiD

[Dr. Shane]

I have declined invitations to join Tea Party events in my area. I think most of them tend to be a bit to angry and a tad bit radical. But I think that is good for our political system. We need people like that. I think the fringe-left goofballs are good for the process too. They make those of us in the middle rethink our positions.

The great thing about America is that those the oppose the politicians in power are free to express themselves without fear the government is going to come after them.

God bless America.

One big issue I have with the health care issue is, if the need is so urgent, why doesn't it kick in for two to four years? What's up with that? Then we here all these sob stories of people without coverage that are not going to get coverage for a few years after it passes anyway. So if they have cancer or heart disease they will be dead before the bill takes affect.

[Dr. Shane]

Let's review, shall we?

1. The deficit is huge and frightening, sparking a national movement called "tea parties" that protest "big government."

2. Health care reform will reduce the deficit by about $116 billion dollars in just the next ten years...

3. If we don't pass health care reform, things will get much, much worse...

I agree with points 1 and 3 but really question the intelligence of anyone that would believe point 2. While I agree with point 3, I am not sold on the Obama's reform as being the health-care reform we need. In fact, I am scared of it. Not one Republican is voting for it. A good bill will have at least 20% of the minority party supporting it.

[karl]

Economics 101 - This country cannot get more health care (and at a higher quality, no less) for less money. Anyone who believes this is possible needs mental health care.

[bonnie]

Economics 101 - This country cannot get more health care (and at a higher quality, no less) for less money. Anyone who believes this is possible needs mental health care.

Aw come on Karl,makes perfect sense doesn't it? Pass a bill not written yet so we can find out what will be in it.

[Dr. Rich]

I too have declined to join tea parties because the foundational issue is being overlooked and since Revelation gives us a picture of a one world government, it is going to happen one way or another. Therefore I just sit on the sideline and watch the ball game.

Most people don't understand that all of this started way back in 1860 when the government changed to a corporation. A corporation is a fictional person--a god or graven image that God's law forbids. We are now living in a "De-Facto" world where we as people have been fictionalized (all capital letters corporation) and we now bow down to these graven images. God never wanted His people to become a fictional person but you have to be in order to get a social [in]security number.

I gave mine up many years ago, but the government refuses to acknowledges it. This is the problem with living in a "De'Facto" world instead of a "De-Jure" Kingdom of Heaven God wanted. I suppose everyone today is living a lie or practicing a lie in some sort of way. How sad!

[karl]

I too have declined to join tea parties because the foundational issue is being overlooked and since Revelation gives us a picture of a one world government, it is going to happen one way or another. Therefore I just sit on the sideline and watch the ball game.

I'm glad our founding fathers didn't share your zeal.

[Bravus]

Of course America can get better health care for less money! It will mean a cut in the massive and extortionate profits of the health insurance industry, which is in the license-to-print-money scam of offering insurance at high prices only to people who don't really need insurance, and then refusing to pay out a lot of the time anyway. But America spends massively more on health than countries like Canada and Australia with part-public/part-private healthcare for worse health outcomes overall. There's nothing magical about American bodies that makes health care cost more... health care in America just has a number of immense insurance tapeworms sucking all the nutrients out of it.

[karl]

Of course America can get better health care for less money! It will mean a cut in the massive and extortionate profits of the health insurance industry.

Insurance is one of the most highly regulated industries in the country. Why do we need a takeover of the entire healthcare system to do what should already be done? If the bureaucrats can't do it now, what makes you think they can do it when the ante is even bigger?

[Dr. Rich]

karl, please do not misunderstand me! I was a front line activist and attempted to get rid of the IRS all on my own and get the government back to a De-Jure, people controlled servant. For this, they gave me a one year time out in one of their cages. I don't see many others who will do this? Would you? I am NOT a wimp--I just will not fight a fight that is Gods. I have been shown things that most people will never see. Rulers of other Nations know my name and what I have written. Do they know yours?

[Bravus]

The cure is - you'll love this: competition! It's the American capitalist way! A public option means there is an insurance company that is *not* beholden to shareholders for ever-increasing profits, and to CEOs for ever-increasing standards of private jets, multimillion bonuses and conspicuous consumption. It means people get health insurance at something close to the actual cost of providing health insurance.

[karl]

The cure is - you'll love this: competition! It's the American capitalist way! A public option means there is an insurance company that is *not* beholden to shareholders for ever-increasing profits, and to CEOs for ever-increasing standards of private jets, multimillion bonuses and conspicuous consumption. It means people get health insurance at something close to the actual cost of providing health insurance.

This has been tried - in Tennessee. Costs quadrupled in ten years and became 38% of the state budget. What do you think they did wrong? Oh, yeah, they didn't have Obama in the White House. That would have fixed everything.

It has been tried in Massachusetts and was a financial bloodbath. Massachusetts people voted against the idea of this being extended nationwide when they elected Scott Brown.

[Bravus]

LOL - maybe Americans just suck at it then: because it works very well indeed in *all* other developed democracies.

[karl]

LOL - maybe Americans just suck at it then: because it works very well indeed in *all* other developed democracies.

It works only by rationing and by making the healthcare workers into indentured servants. Why do you think 11% of the doctors and nurses trained in Canada come to the US? Moving internationally is a very expensive and disruptive undertaking. Why do they do it? Because back home in Canada its a lot less pay for a lot more work. That's the indentured servant part of the equation. Do I need to spell out the rationing part of it for you?

Socialized medicine works fine if you're not severely ill. If you need expensive care in a hurry, though.... good luck!

[bonnie]

The cure is - you'll love this: competition! It's the American capitalist way! A public option means there is an insurance company that is *not* beholden to shareholders for ever-increasing profits, and to CEOs for ever-increasing standards of private jets, multimillion bonuses and conspicuous consumption. It means people get health insurance at something close to the actual cost of providing health insurance.

Competition is the american capitalist way. A public option is not competition. When your competition does not have to make a profit and when short of money just take more from the taxpayer

only someone dishonest or lacking any understanding of the word competition would call it such.

A simple way to have competition is to allow americans buy insurance out of state. Government will not allow that.Why Not?

Have you read the "excessive profits" insurance companies take.Look it up. Our "shareholders" like Nancy Pelosi with her excessive use of jets and liquor for her family do very well.

Why is it americans do not routinely go to other countries for medical care,but those from other countries come here?

As to new technology and treatments where is most discovered? I am sure there is some from outside the US,but the bulk of it comes from where?

I can't say for certain but I have never read where other countries that have switched to socialized medicine did so quite the way Obama wants ours.

HIs tear jerking stories he uses have all proved to be untrue. Why does he feel the need to lie?

We have no bill yet he wants it signed and we will worry about what to put in it later? Great plan.

He will bribe and threaten and bully to get what he wants.

[bonnie]

I am scheduled for knee surgery the 30th of March. My primary care physician prefers a specific orthopedic surgeon which has caused the wait I would not have had otherwise.He is on a mission trip with his church performing surgeries in Africa.

Had I had it to do over I would have taken any DR available. The pain has been intense and has really curtailed my life.

I have a cousin in Vancouver,B.C and one in Mississauga. They both assure me my wait time there would be a lot longer. Just why would that be attractive?

I do have insurance but if not I would still receive medical care and a whole lot sooner than socialized medicine.

Explain to me Obama's math as you seem to think he is on the right track.

Reduce medicare payments by 500 billion and increase those on medicare and medical care will improve

HURRY,HURRY pass whatever,it is not necessary to know what you are passing,just pass it ,people are dying.

Oops,forgot to add the only portion of this to go into effect before 3-4 years is the tax hikes. How many by Obama's calculations will die while waiting for this miracle of medical care?

[Dr. Shane]

Why do you think 11% of the doctors and nurses trained in Canada come to the US? ...Because back home in Canada its a lot less pay for a lot more work.

I don't think that is correct. Check out ---> Physician Salaries Primary care physicians actually make more in Canada. We really need to check things out before repeating other's talking points.

[Bravus]

Good stuff, Shane.

The other elephant in the room in US healthcare is, of course, the litigious society. The Obama administration, IMO, is dropping the ball by not making tort reform an integral part of health care reform.

[Dr. Shane]

Of course America can get better health care for less money! It will mean a cut in the massive and extortionate profits of the health insurance industry...

As someone mentioned here, the insurance industry is highly regulated in the US. The government actually tells them how little and how much they can charge.

The problem with the government is that it is highly inefficient. The private sector can build roads, bridges, schools and office buildings cheaper than the government can. That is why these things are contracted out to the private sector. Private schools also are run more efficiently than government schools (cost/pupil). The private prisons that exist are run more efficiently (cost/prisoner). It is highly likely that the amount of money wasted by the government, due to inefficiency, would be greater in a government-run plan than the profit earned by the private sector. That has proved to be the case in construction, schools and prisons.

[Dr. Shane]

I do favor health-care reform. I started another thread ---> Shane's Healthcare Plan where I discuss that. The status-quo is not acceptable.

Here is an outline for those who do not want to go into that forum:

This is an outline of the health care reform I would like to see.

1. All employers required to provide HSAs or other approved medical insurance plans for all employees. The HSA would have a major medical policy which would pay 100% of costs over $10,000. (Google HSA if you don't know what they are) Employers would pay for 66% of extended family plan.

2. A menu of health care plans would be created which could be sold across state lines and thus allow for more competition.

3. All medical malpractice suits would need to be filed in federal court. Awards for "pain and suffering" should be capped at $250K while unlimited damages allowed for actual damages. Attorney fees would be limited on a graduated scale - the higher the award the lower percentage the fee the attorney could charge.

4. Insurance companies would have to cover pre-existing conditions.

5. Those on unemployment would be eligible for medi-care. Those with assets greater than $100K (not including their home) would be charged a premium.

6. Medical discounts would be given for those who get their preventative check-ups and tests. Discounts would also be given for lifestyle choices such as not smoking and not being over-weight.

7. Continue ban on public funding of abortion.

[aldona]

Quote:

It works only by rationing and by making the healthcare workers into indentured servants....Socialized medicine works fine if you're not severely ill. If you need expensive care in a hurry, though.... good luck!

That sound you hear is myself and every single other doctor in Australia rolling around on the floor laughing their heads off.

Indentured servants - that's a new one. Haven't heard that one yet.

aldona

[Neil D]

It works only by rationing and by making the healthcare workers into indentured servants. Why do you think 11% of the doctors and nurses trained in Canada come to the US? Moving internationally is a very expensive and disruptive undertaking. Why do they do it? Because back home in Canada its a lot less pay for a lot more work. That's the indentured servant part of the equation. Do I need to spell out the rationing part of it for you?

Socialized medicine works fine if you're not severely ill. If you need expensive care in a hurry, though.... good luck!

I just got thru with some good ol' american healthcare. I have the bills to prove it. My 20% of my bill is a lot of money that I have to come up with....AND I STILL HAVE A JOB...I can just imagine if I was on a fixed income...and I know a lot of people who are on a fixed income....

"Socialized medicine works fine if you're not severely ill"....gee, that sounds like current american healthcare....You can't get in to your doctor if you have something other than a minor emergency...you have to wait, depending on how popular your doctor is...at least 3 weeks...

If you go to the ER, it will cost you nearly $300 minimum just to go thru the doors to see a doctor. And the average out of pocket cost in the ER if you are really sick, is $1000...You got that amount sitting around to give to someone?

As for Doctors "running to the US", implying that they can make more money here...I suggest that you reread url=http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112818960]THIS ARTICLE FROM NPR as it might be ...well, 'mind altering"...that is, if you don't "mind", it can "alter" your opinion....

[bonnie]

Quote:

I just got thru with some good ol' american healthcare. I have the bills to prove it. My 20% of my bill is a lot of money that I have to come up with....AND I STILL HAVE A JOB...I can just imagine if I was on a fixed income...and I know a lot of people who are on a fixed income....

Who should pay your medical bills? On a fixed income you work out a payment plan you can meet. Many of us have done just that and not expected someone else to pick up the tab.

Quote:

"Socialized medicine works fine if you're not severely ill"....gee, that sounds like current american healthcare....You can't get in to your doctor if you have something other than a minor emergency...you have to wait, depending on how popular your doctor is...at least 3 weeks...

Really. I don't know of anyone that waits to see their primary care physician for three weeks. Made 2 appointments this morning. Had my choice,late tomorrow afternoon or Mon morn.Our Dr is extremely popular and in demand

Quote:

If you go to the ER, it will cost you nearly $300 minimum just to go thru the doors to see a doctor. And the average out of pocket cost in the ER if you are really sick, is $1000...You got that amount sitting around to give to someone?

Most of the time if people chose to they could use urgent care which is cheaper. But again,why shouldn't those that use it pay for it.

I spent 5 hours in ER not long ago. What part of that bill should I pass onto you if not covered by insurance? If you have internet,cable and other luxuries,cancel that and pay your bills.ER does not refuse you and will work with you over time to pay the bill

[karl]

Quote:

It works only by rationing and by making the healthcare workers into indentured servants....Socialized medicine works fine if you're not severely ill. If you need expensive care in a hurry, though.... good luck!

That sound you hear is myself and every single other doctor in Australia rolling around on the floor laughing their heads off.

Indentured servants - that's a new one. Haven't heard that one yet.

aldona

Who decides what you can charge for your services, Aldona? If it's not you, you are an indentured servant.

Government provided health care can increase only in inverse proportion to freedom. Controls and regulations crowd out individuals who manage their own health and physicians who manage their own careers and the free choices that both make. The only sound basis for health care is individual rights and free choice in the market place.

Australia's universal health care scheme is relatively new (introduced in 1983, which built on the 1974 Medibank program). As with all socialized health care systems, there is a mixture of public versus private care (approximately 30% of Australians also retain private health insurance). As a result, the private patients receive better care than their medicare counterparts.

The salary caps and artificial increase in demand for care that always occur in a national health care system are resulting in predictable physician shortages.

Here is an article from the 2005 Herald Sun (Australia)

DELAYS in emergency departments are risking lives: one in six Victorians suffering conditions such as chest pains is forced to wait for treatment.

And one in five awaiting elective surgery for painful or disabling ailments is forced to wait more than three months.

The most urgent elective cases in the past year were treated within the standard 30 days, but only 79 per cent of category two patients were seen in the standard 90 days.

Department of Health figures reveal bed and staff shortages.

The Health Services Union blamed a lack of staff and inadequate government funding.

It has led to a campaign to encourage people with minor ailments to see GPs, to take the pressure off public hospitals.

--------------------

[Dr. Shane]

If you go to the ER, it will cost you nearly $300 minimum just to go thru the doors to see a doctor. And the average out of pocket cost in the ER if you are really sick, is $1000...You got that amount sitting around to give to someone?

Each of us should have at least $1,000 in the bank as an emergency fund. It is simply irresponsible to be living paycheck to paycheck with no emergency fund in the bank.

Health-care reform will not due away with co-pays and deductibles. No one should be led to believe that health-care reform is going to result in "free" health-care. That simply isn't so.