Wednesday, March 24, 2010

Health Care Reform 2010

It has taken me some time to compose a coherent response to the passage of the Health Care Reform Bill, not because I oppose it, because I’m befuddled at and ashamed of the behavior of its detractors. The similarities between the current response and the responses of a significant number of citizens and legislators from the period of Reconstruction through and even after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 are disconcerting if not frightening. Before some of you decry “race card”, please continue to read. It was Rush Limbaugh who first publicly coined the bill as the “new Civil Rights Bill” and “reparations” and thanks to his and his comrades’ spewing of such propaganda, the public is responding accordingly. Dr. King, Presidents Kennedy, and Johnson were accused of communism and socialism just as President Obama, Senators Pelosi, and Reid are today. This is not coincidental for it foments the creation of the most powerful barrier to thinking and change: fear.
Today, there is certainly an element of race involved as minorities, particularly those of African descent are often associated with poverty and consequently welfare. Because this bill is an entitlement policy, deemed by those on the right as wealth redistribution (a nice way of saying the government is playing Robin Hood—robbing the rich to give to the poor. This does not mention how the impoverished are often robbed of opportunities and disenfranchised by policies designed to assist the wealthy in maintaining most of their wealth through tax shelters and off shore accounts, but I digress). I am not saying that the wealthy are exclusively greedy and undeserving, nor am I saying the poor are exclusively downtrodden and deserving. I am only stating the obvious which is that separate and unequal still exists and it is a matter of class and not simply race. However, separate and unequal is a fundamental component within capitalism. It must be. There can be no pursuit and attainment of wealth and the upper echelons of society without there being lower and middle classes. If all was equal, there would be nothing for which to strive. Again, I digress.
Since when did it become appropriate to spit at legislators or anyone for that matter because you disagree with their politics? Scream xenophobic epithets at them? Accuse them of treason? The law has been followed even with the strong arm tactics employed. Many want to make an issue of the division 219 to 212. This is still a majority, albeit a slim one, similar in fact to the slim majority that elected Bush in 2000. Democrats were incensed, particularly following a Supreme Court ruling which solidified the Electoral College’s decision. Nonetheless, the law was followed and the judicial branch, as it is designed to do, ruled on the legality of the decision. Such is the case here. The law has been followed. The bill has been passed by a slim margin. President Bush was elected by a slim margin. The best thing the country can do is get over both decisions and make the best of them.
I do not agree with everything in the bill, particularly mandatory purchase of insurance without a public option (which is the “backroom deal” everyone should be angry about—a topic for a later blog). There are always going to be obstacles to progression. After reconstruction, many states passed Jim Crow Laws to obstruct the 14th and 15th Amendments effectively nullifying the 13th Amendment all the while proclaiming the supremacy of states’ rights. Citizens spat on and protested the Little Rock Nine—black school children who were simply following federal law desegregating schools. The people angry about the Health Care Reform Bill are acting the same. It is truly a shame. This is exactly the level of anarchy the republicans seem to have desired for if it were not, they would have actively participated in the design and composition of the bill instead of the hatemongering they exhibited. LBJ and Senator Dirksen (ironically from IL) had to strong arm Congress to pass the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 with a vote of 290 to 130. Does this mean that since 130 (44.8%) voted against the bill, that it should be repealed? Some of the pundits today would have you believe so. This is not a popularity contest. Lincoln made an unpopular move to sign the Emancipation Proclamation; Kennedy, Johnson, and Dirksen made similar moves and usurped states’ rights and even some private rights to provide equality for all citizens.

No comments: