[Peace-discuss] [cchcc-l] Saturday's Health Reform Update &Take Action!
Morton K. Brussel
brussel at illinois.edu
Mon Mar 22 23:15:16 CDT 2010
Thanks for your response Ricky.
In answer to your question, I don't know all the people you know who have…, so I can't disagree with your question.
Since we don't have a crystal ball, we can't know what the future will bring, so there are bound to be disagreements on this issue.
Mort
On Mar 22, 2010, at 8:14 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote:
> Yeah, I think we all mostly agree, though I know that sounds silly. And I know I disagree with many of my friends on part of what I said here.
>
> But did you mean that you disagree with this part, too: " ...of all the people I know who have actually organized a single event around that proposal [single payer] - most of them supported this bill"? In fact I'm not sure I can name one counterexample, that is, someone who has organized an event for single payer but who also opposed this bill -- to my knowledge anyway.
>
> Let's be clear, though. I originally thought, without a whopping big "public option" no version of the plan would be worth passing. When I looked at the specifics I changed my mind.
>
> Ricky
>
> "Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn
>
> --- On Mon, 3/22/10, Morton K. Brussel <brussel at illinois.edu> wrote:
>
> From: Morton K. Brussel <brussel at illinois.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [cchcc-l] Saturday's Health Reform Update &Take Action!
> To: "Ricky Baldwin" <baldwinricky at yahoo.com>
> Cc: "John W." <jbw292002 at gmail.com>, "unionyes" <unionyes at ameritech.net>, "Peace-discuss" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
> Date: Monday, March 22, 2010, 2:57 PM
>
> Ricky,
>
> I like your first paragraph but disagree with the rest.
>
> Did you read/listen to what Nader had to say (on DemocracyNow!) about this bill? He wanted it defeated if it didn't have a public option. Have you listened to the Moyers PBS programs on this issue?
>
> The "public option" is/was not equivalent to a single payer system, so it was not an all-or-nothing-at-all situation. It would have been a compromise.
>
> Now, the insurance companies and big pharma have gained more power than ever, and thus the present situation is likely to endure, especially with the present corruption in our government, i.e., you can wait till hell freezes over before a single payer system or a medicare-for-all option appears on the horizon.
>
> It is difficult to assess, in fact , whether more will suffer or be saved by this bill in the long run, a bill which will not come much into effect before 2014.
>
> So I'm more than disappointed by the CCHCC and the Democratic triumphalism in having passed this lousy bill.
>
> My 2¢ --mkb
>
>
> On Mar 22, 2010, at 2:30 PM, Ricky Baldwin wrote:
>
>> Well, first what I agree with: The Democrats are not "friends and allies" of the working class. We need single payer and we need it not just yesterday generations ago. Ultimately the only solution is to take profit out of the game entirely. Independent oversight will still be necessary, even then. There is no end to the struggle. The bill that passed is not the one we needed, have needed for so long. There are serious problems with the bill as it stands, and it is by no means certain that those problems will not remain. It is very likely that the popular forces organized to pass this bill will gear down quite a lot now. Insurance companies will profit. The cards are definitely stacked against most people, who aren't well-to-do.
>>
>> However, it does not follow that nothing can be accomplished in this game. OSHA, for example, has saved thousands of lives, prevented many thousands of injuries and illnesses, almost certainly, and yet it was a compromise.
>>
>> I must disagree with the assertion that nobody will be helped by this health care bill. Millions of people, among them members of my own family, will benefit from things like closing the Medicare doughnut hole, just for one example. That is why both CCHCC and CBHC, though they do not often see eye to eye, supported the bill in the end. Because "no compromise" means people will die, people will get sicker, who would not if we compromise.
>>
>> I know, I know. In the long run if we do not get single payer, in fact if we do not overthrow capitalism and the state, people will sicken and die who would not. I'm just not thrilled about the chances of any of that at the moment. The idea that defeating this itty-bitty reform will raise expectations I don't find convincing; more likely it will lower expectations, according to the pattern as I see it anyway. It is not enough for people to be angry. If it were, we'd have solved a lot of other problems by now, too. People also have to have some reason to believe that a particular effort will pay off in some way. People are not stupid, and they are very busy trying to stay afloat. Heaping all our eggs in the single payer basket is a very risky business indeed if you're already getting your lights shut off because of health care costs.
>>
>> Look, the movement has to come first, not the bill. If the movement, the protest, the disruption, the organization, is there, then, sure, fight for the bill. But to say that passing this bill will quench the movement? What that says is the movement is pretty easily quenched. That is, it isn't there. Single payer has been out there for years - where are the masses in the streets demanding it? I'm not slamming people. There's a lot going on, etc. I'm just saying the movement isn't there. Yet. Single payer polls well, sure, and I support it, but of all the people I know who have actually organized a single event around that proposal - most of them supported this bill.
>>
>> That tells me a lot about what is possible.
>>
>> Ricky
>>
>> "Speak your mind even if your voice shakes." - Maggie Kuhn
>>
>> --- On Sun, 3/21/10, unionyes <unionyes at ameritech.net> wrote:
>>
>> From: unionyes <unionyes at ameritech.net>
>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [cchcc-l] Saturday's Health Reform Update &Take Action!
>> To: "John W." <jbw292002 at gmail.com>
>> Cc: "Peace-discuss" <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>> Date: Sunday, March 21, 2010, 5:45 PM
>>
>> Here is the problem John,
>>
>> We have some really excellent well intentioned and hard working activists for health care for all in both CCHCC and CBHC.
>>
>> With that said, I seem to perceive that many of these activists are under the dellusion that the democratic party in general are their " friends " and that they can " play " the political process to obtain their ( our ) objectives.
>>
>> What they fail to understand is that it is a rigged game.
>> We cannot compete in the political game with the same failing startegies for two main reasons.
>>
>> 1) We cannot match corporate money. WE need to hit them ( the sell-out corporate dems ) where it hurts the most, deny them our ; volunteer campaign time ( phone banks, door to door, etc. ) and our votes, and our money as well.
>>
>> Look at organized labor this last election. HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of rank and file Union members doing phone banks and door to door for Obama and the Dems, and the votes of Union members and their families ( which is a huge percentage of working class votes since Union members have a much higher voter registration rate than their non-Union counterparts ). This made ALL of the difference in swing states like ; Indiana, Ohio, Iowa, Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida, which would NOT have went to Obama otherwise.
>> What was Organized Labor's pay back ?...
>> Totally ignored and patronized by the Obama admin. and the dems in general in regards to ANY of their issues ( in particular the Employee Free Choice Act ).
>> Basicly, a " thank you very much, fuck you very much " response.
>>
>> In essence, this is what the dem poitician"s attitude is ; That we are too stupid to realize that we are being played in a " good cop / bad cop " game. They ( most dems and repubs ) are on the same corporate team, playing against us ( WE THE PEOPLE ).
>> And that even if some of us realize that we are being played, that we have no where else to go. That we won't vote republican or for a third party.
>> They think the majority of the American people are sheep and that they can play both sides of the street ( corporate money and the votes of the people ).
>> Well time has shown who always wins out in that scenario.
>>
>> 2) We are allowing the corporate media to control the narrative, that is, define the issues.
>> This is what caused Kucinich last week to cave-in.
>>
>> 3) Many activists think that some reform is better than no reform, even when it harms the long-term objective.
>>
>> We all need to think and act outside the box. NOT play by their rules. Define our own narrative by speaking the truth and REFUSING to submit to compromise that harms the long-term objective.
>>
>> One manifestation of this should be our refusal to support dems or ANY candidate for public office in the 2010 election who take corporate money.
>> The other practice ( in my opinion ) should be to tell our ; friends family, neighbors, co-workers, etc. not just the previous, but also to stop watching and listening to the corporate media for information.
>> It is all lies and distortions and most people acknowledge this, but most still watch and listen to it out of habit.
>>
>> Just my opinions, but we MUST change the strategies.
>> Because the traditional tactics are NOT working.
>>
>> David Johnson
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: John W.
>> To: naiman.uiuc at gmail.com
>> Cc: Peace-discuss List ; Karen Medina
>> Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 2:35 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [cchcc-l] Saturday's Health Reform Update &Take Action!
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Robert Naiman <naiman.uiuc at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> CBHC is urging a yes vote, just like CCHCC.
>> See: http://www.cbhconline.org/index.html
>>
>> Well, it's still not reform in any meaningful sense. It's a demon-spawned death bill.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 1:02 PM, Karen Medina <kmedina67 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I am with you, David. This is not reform. This bill will hurt people
>> > and help the insurance companies. The people need universal health
>> > care.
>> >
>> > I am surprised and confused as to why the CCHCC supports the bill.
>> >
>> > I am pretty sure Jim Duffet's group members (for health care reform)
>> > do not support the bill.
>> >
>> > -karen medina
>>
>> --
>> Robert Naiman
>> Policy Director
>> Just Foreign Policy
>> www.justforeignpolicy.org
>> naiman at justforeignpolicy.org
>>
>> --
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>> believed to be clean.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>
>> --
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>> believed to be clean.
>>
>> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>>
>>
>> --
>> This message has been scanned for viruses and
>> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
>> believed to be clean. _______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
>> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
>
>
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20100322/10c4f579/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Peace-discuss
mailing list