The current, primary problem with the new healthcare law isn’t all the major glitches with the website. Truth be told, if all Intramuralist readers based their opinion of our ongoing dialogue on the initial days of our website, we, too, would probably have far fewer numbers than the some 2,000 of you that are regular visitors.
The primary problem isn’t even the deep polarization surrounding the law. Democrats supposedly love it — a historic, long-coveted legislative victory! Republicans hate it — we’re doomed via this socialist, massive government control!
No, it’s not even the consistently negative public opinion of the law. From CNN’s most recent poll this month, showing 56% in opposition of the legislation to even Comedy Central’s Jon Stewart — not known for any conservative allegiance — calling the law/rollout a highly descriptive “turd” on this week’s broadcast.
I really don’t believe any of the above are the primary problem.
As stated repeatedly amidst these posts, the Intramuralist has serious concerns about the Affordable Care Act. Having read the entire piece prior to its passage, there are multiple, specific aspects and implications driving my concern, primarily in regard to cost, inefficiency, economics, and increased government control. Nonetheless, I don’t see it as the current primary problem.
Let’s return to Rep. Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) profound statement from March of 2010, saying, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy.”
The current, primary problem with Obamacare is that we still can’t find out what’s in it. There’s too much controversy, too much salesmanship, and too many ambiguities or potential mistruths.
Regarding the controversy, remember that the law was enacted without a single Republican vote. When Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) was elected and the chances for a filibuster-proof bill fizzled, the Senate then utilized an obscure budgetary tactic even though the bill was not about the budget. Any significant piece of legislation passed in such a manipulated way would seem to invite such controversy.
There’s also too much salesmanship. Instead of objective analysis, the elect and their microphone-loving cohorts are trying to convince instead of educate. Education allows for the good and the bad; however, our leadership works instead to convince us of only the good or the bad.
Just yesterday, for example, I received two ironically contrasting emails. One was from a conservative writer, telling me that “Obamacare is broken beyond repair.” The other was from Obama, telling me he needs me “to be a part of Team Obamacare” and tell everyone I know about the law. The challenge with both of those messages is that they only include the good or the bad. They are trying to sell us on a product or perspective.
Lastly, there exist too many ambiguities and potential mistruths… the whole idea that “if you like your healthcare plan, you can keep” it… the “death panels”… and just this week, HH&S Sec. Kathleen Sebelius (the current most likely candidate to be thrown under the bus, by the way) saying the President didn’t know anything about the website failures beforehand… former Obama Press Sec. Robert Gibbs saying “there’s no doubt” people at HHS and those involved knew… CBS News saying the website is providing “incredibly misleading” estimates. The ambiguous examples are countless. It’s simply too hard to know what’s true.
The current, primary problem with the healthcare law? Nancy Pelosi was wrong; we still don’t know what’s in it, as we remain in the fog of the controversy.
Respectfully,
AR