Distortions in Healthcare Proposals

Carol is an e-mail correspondent, with whom I have had semi-continuous contact. She has sent me a letter, on which I am commenting below.

Good morning, Carol.

I have read the letter from Citizens for Real Health Care Reform and a Public Option, which you sent me. I have attached a copy for other recipients of this e-mail.

The letter starts with an attempt to create a favorable emotional aspect to the " cause" by bringing in the death of Sen. Ted Kennedy. If you think about it, you may see that the intent is for you to embrace Public Healthcare, because Ted Kennedy did, and you respect his opinion. There is no room for private analysis of facts.

It goes on to say, "Myths, distortions, and bald-faced lies about President Obama's proposed health care reform have been cynically promoted by the insurance industry". This is a generally emotional statement. Perhaps we will see later in the letter some supporting facts.

The next paragraph says that millions of dollars in special interest advertising and the 24-hour news cycle have threatened reform efforts. Are there no millions of dollars spent in supporting government healthcare?

The letter asks you to submit a letter to the editor of your local newspaper today to make sure your neighbors know the cost-reducing FACTS about health care reform and the public option. If I were going to write such a letter, I would not be able to include the "cost-reducing facts". It doesn't say what they are in the "Citizens letter" to you.



Comments on the Wall Street Journal's poll:

1.) Stopping Health Care for the Elderly. This is not a true or false situation. Complete government control of health care allows government to do whatever it wishes. If it wishes to eliminate health care to the elderly, it can do so. If it wishes to double healthcare for the elderly, it can do that too. If you are not now elderly, you will eventually be. Do you want government to control your life destiny?

2.) Public Option. The letter says 54% of those polled FALSELY believe that health care reform would lead to a "government takeover of the health care system.". Who judges that this is a false belief? There are too many generalities in the statements. Healthcare reform as presently proposed by the Administration and in the House bills primarily include a government takeover of the healthcare system. However, reform does not necessarily mean that one condition. Other changes to the healthcare system would be desirable. As said in 1.) above, most people see that health care reform, as presently defined, would lead to a government takeover.

3.) Illegal Immigrants. The poll says 55% of Americans FALSELY believe President Obama's plan would extend health insurance coverage to illegal immigrants. Who says it's false? Here we have a play on words and timing. The Obama Administration has clearly indicated its policy to legalize all presently illegal immigrants in the US. As this may take place, the public is not deceived into recognizing that there will be no illegal immigrants in future. This will indirectly supply healthcare to immigrants who are now illegal but may not be illegal in the future.



The letter goes on to say again that you should submit a letter to the editor of your local newspaper now and make sure your neighbors know the choice-expanding FACTS about health care reform and the public option. It will be impossible to present all the facts of the healthcare situation related to reform and the public option. Even if you were able to do so, the newspaper editor and your neighbors would very likely be unable to come to a logical conclusion on action to be taken. Public decisions are mostly made from an emotional point of view supported by one or two perceived facts. That perception can easily be faulty, which is why our government was originally established as a Republic, wherein designated individuals have the responsibility to investigate issues, which the public has neither the time nor inclination to do.

The letter says the insurance industry lobby and political operatives who are subverting the truth want to erode support for the comprehensive reform we need to fix America's broken health care system. This is likely partially true. The converse is likely partially true, in that supporters want to subvert the truth in order to "support the comprehensive reform we need to fix America's broken health care system". One must question the backgrounds and motivations of every individual or group that takes a position on an issue. In support of their position, facts or likely outcomes are many times distorted through rationalization. A friend of mine, who works with the religious aspects of jail inmates, reports that more than 90% of the inmates claim they are innocent and victims of misguided justice. Justice can occasionally go wrong, but 90%?

The letter says that polls still show most Americans support President Obama's health care reform plan and the public option once they know the real truth. As I have before, real truth is a matter of perception combined with analysis. I suspect that if most Americans support Pres. Obama's Health Care Reform Plan, they do so on the basis of supporting Pres. Obama as a personality involving his charisma and his superb oratory skills. This is combined with his routinely repeated message of hope and progress, which is bound to appeal to every human being.

The letter asks you to submit your letter to the Editor. This is the third time they ask you to do this. Note that it does not say what specifics you should cover in your letter to the editor. It implies that they have given you enough emotional support, so that your "letter to the editor" will start with your support for the Obama Health Plan and follow with an emotional outburst of derogatory comments relating to the opposition. This would include mentioning "the powerful insurance industry crush efforts to reform health care in the past. We can't let them get away with it again". The letter then asks you for the fourth time to be sure to write such letter to the Editor.

Carol, since you are a researcher with analytical skills, I am sure my above suggestions to look into details may not be necessary. However, based on our previous communications, I suspect that your emotional approach clouds your technical capabilities and performance.