Here’s a video of the riot outside last night’s Tampa town hall meeting. If you listen, at one point you can hear someone by the doors who appears to be a police officer trying to explain that the hall was filled to capacity and that allowing more people in would be a violation of fire safety code. The rioters weren’t buying it.
With fists pounding on exterior windows like a street mob out of a 1930s newsreel, a crowd of right-wing agitators against health insurance reform descended on a town hall meeting in Tampa, Florida, “banging on windows” until police and organizers were forced to end the event. The result? A violent mob silenced the voices of each and every American desperate to find a way out of the endless cycle of fear, shame and family bankruptcy brought on by an inhumane, profit-driven health insurance market. Moreover, by using violence to shut down civic discussion between neighbors, this right-wing horde trampled underfoot one of the most sacred and historic symbols of American democracy.
There’s a famous Norman Rockwell painting titled “Freedom of Speech,” depicting an idealized American town meeting. The painting, part of a series illustrating F.D.R.’s “Four Freedoms,” shows an ordinary citizen expressing an unpopular opinion. His neighbors obviously don’t like what he’s saying, but they’re letting him speak his mind.
That’s a far cry from what has been happening at recent town halls, where angry protesters — some of them, with no apparent sense of irony, shouting “This is America!” — have been drowning out, and in some cases threatening, members of Congress trying to talk about health reform.
As a columnist who regularly dishes out sharp criticism, I try not to question the motives of people with whom I don’t agree. Today, I’m going to step over that line.
The recent attacks by Republican leaders and their ideological fellow-travelers on the effort to reform the health-care system have been so misleading, so disingenuous, that they could only spring from a cynical effort to gain partisan political advantage. By poisoning the political well, they’ve given up any pretense of being the loyal opposition. They’ve become political terrorists, willing to say or do anything to prevent the country from reaching a consensus on one of its most serious domestic problems.
They’ve become political terrorists. Yeah, pretty much.
Apparently at a meeting in St. Louis, the wingnut mob was met by equal numbers of pro-reform counter-protesters, and at least one counter-protester (and a Post-Dispatch reporter) were arrested. It’s very possible the St. Louis police held counter-protesters to a different standard.
Even so, I say again that if anyone is going to go to the town hall meetings to counter the mob, non-violence is essential. Otherwise you’re just taking the bait.
That said, I found a list of upcoming town hall meetings on an astroturf site that the mob is using to pick its targets. Do what you think you need to do.
Update: Via Brian Beutler:
"Based on the news that health care events are edging into violence, an anti-health care reform protester in New Mexico named Scott Oskay is calling on his hundreds of online followers to bring firearms to town halls, and to 'badly hurt' SEIU and ACORN counter protesters."
People are calling SEIU and making not-too-veiled threats of gun violence against Union members.
I wrote in one of the comments, "Terrorists, like it or not, are people who believe they are doing the right thing and feel passionately about their cause. They also feel that anything they do is justified because they have Absolute Right on their side."
So, yes, some of these thugs definitely are moving out of the "passtionate protester" category and into the "terrorist" category. Threats of violence qualify as terrorism, even if they don't carry it through.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Skip Williamson
Liz Emrich
Bill Michtom
Roger Fallihee
Cymraeg
Krugman
Salon.com
Comments
Many of those demonstrations were very well organized and some were more violent than anything that is happening at these Town Hall meetings.
Of course the difference is that most of these demonstrations, with the exception of maybe some of the Civil Rights demonstrations, were promoted by the left wingers.
How much outrage did we hear from Paul Krugman on these people?
I know you are a fair person so I will be waiting for your next post about what I have mentioned.
I have written about demonstrations a lot on my personal blog. I have a long history of arguing with other lefties about how leftie demonstrations are conducted. I have even criticized Code Pink, Jane Fonda and Cindy Sheehan on occasion. I have long believed that violence and anger are counter-productive.
Of course, you assume that I always defend the Left, because you are a hateful, bigoted snot.
As for what makes a protest "astroturf" and what doesn't, it should be obvious even to you that Martin Luther King's demonstrations were not being underwritten by the Koch Foundation and a pack of unnamed corporate sponsors.
BTW, I intend to delete your comments from now on, if that's the only way I can discourage you from commenting here. If you had something intelligent to say now and then I wouldn't mind, but all you ever do is hurl invective.
But, I think this would be a good project for you. I look forward to reading it. Don't make Barbara do your homework for you.
Now you can spin this anyway you want but the fact of the matter is I WAS THERE. I saw no terrorists, no swastikas, no "mob". What I DID see was concerned citizens who were tired of the government sticking it's nose where it doesn't belong. Believe what you want. The truth is the truth.
And here we've been told for years that dissent is patriotic...
I, on the other hand, have worked as an independent contractor for more than a decade. I pay through the nose to get catastrophic coverage for myself and my children. I DO want a public option.
There is clearly more to these protests (and the "astroturf" conservative groups organizing them) than you're willing to admit to, and that's what's bothering me.
Between these protests and the birthers, I fear we've lost any semblance of reasonable dissent in this country and that's the scariest notion of all.
Is anyone catching it?
The Four Freedoms only extend to other conservatives for the conservatives but they are for everyone in the mind of liberals, libertarians and centrists.
So who are the enemies of the state? Who are the terrorists?
These questions must be asked because I think a few people need to lose their broadcasting licenses if not their entire careers for that which they have wrought.
For the most part, protests are organized. Participants receive varying degrees of instruction. This is true regardless of the movement or cause.
It's astroturf from monied interests? Well, that should be expected.
The real story is the emotions involved in these latest efforts. What bears notice is the willingness of American citizens to engage in it, what they are for and against and what bearing it has on civil discourse and domestic tranquility.
In other words, the mob was there to be sure only their point of view was heard, and everyone else was shouted down. Thanks for confessing.
However, had you listened, you might have learned something.
And the other part that would be amusing if it weren't so tragic is that some of those people in that mob appear old enough to be on Medicare, which is a government-run health care plan very similar to Canada's.
However, if you had waded into that mob and tried to explain that to them, you probably wouldn't gotten thoroughly pummeled for your trouble. It would be like trying to teach physics to rabid wolverines.
I'm a freelancer, too. I recently had to let go of my Blue Cross/Blue Sheild HMO policy that was excellent, but I couldn't pay for it any more. I now have a much cheaper policy through the Freelancer's Union that is less comprehensive and has higher co-pays, but at least I do have insurance, thanks to New York state regulations. In other states I'd be un-insurable because I'm 57 years old and have high cholesterol.
If the Dems pass a bill without a public option, I may riot, too. Just kidding.
By definition, an "astroturf" movement is a movement that pretends to be grassroots but which was actually initiated and organized by monied interests. Just because "real people" buy into it and participate doesn't make it not "astroturf." It just makes them "tools."
It is very possible for an organization to receive large donations and not be astroturf. Such an organization (1) doesn't pretend to be grassroots, and (2) is completely transparent about who is giving them money. Agree or disagree with them, but you can't call them "astroturf."
A lot of the organizations that initiated the current protests are getting lots of corporate money but won't discose who is donating to them. Americans for Prosperity is an example.
In this case, it's obvious people have been whipped into a frenzy by a pack of lies being packaged and sold by insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and everyone else who stands to lose money if health care reform goes through.
There are plenty of points in the several versions of health care bills in Congress on which reasonable people can disagree. None of the bills being discussed is exactly the one I would have liked. However, the objections coming from the mob are sheer fantasy and hysteria and have little to do with what is actually being proposed. But they are too hysterical to be reasoned with. They're just there to shut down the debate.
Ultimately, I truly believe this is all about "Fear of a Black President." I think the GOP is purposely, and cynically, whipping the frenzies of a frightened, bigoted (but large) minority and calling it "legitimate protest."
These are the same people who showed up at Palin rallies, who question the President's citizenship, who believe Glenn Beck when he says Obama has a "deep seeded (sic) hatred of white people."
In 30 years' time, the demographics of this country will have changed enough to make genuine fringe groups out of these folks. With luck, (and with adequate health insurance) I'll be alive to see that day.
People are not automatons. They show up only if they care."
Peggy Noonan
It is disingenuous to say the least to call concerned citizens mobs and terrorists. It's also transparent. These are not Nazis, they are Americans. Some of them looked like they'd actually spent some time fighting Nazi's. Politicians work for us. They will be voted out in droves as they continue to show they are unable to meet with their constituents and answer simple questions.
Oh and go ahead and report me at flag@whitehouse.gov.
As Barbara pointed out, many are old enough to be eligible for (and probably participating in) Medicaid. They seem to be wildly (and willingly) misinformed on the issue at hand, and they seem not to want information, but rather the opportunity to shout down anyone attempting to provide it.
These disruptions aren't evidence of debate, they're protests. But, again, against WHAT, specifically? It's a genuine question, so I hope you respond.
It usually destroys any logical argument they may have.
Yes, these people are American protestors. Sometimes they yell loud and when the unions show up the violence begins.
It doesn't matter whether they are organized or not. Most protests about major matters have been organized in some fashion.
I, like the majority of voters, believe health care reform is essential, and I think the time to get it achieved was yesterday, so yes, I'm really anxious to see it pass this time, even if what passes is less reform than I'd like.
I genuinely do not understand these protestors' issues with what's currently on the table, and I suspect they don't understand themselves. Because it doesn't seem to be about the actual issues, does it?
1. Union members are patriotic, taxpaying Americans, too.
2. In a wonderful post at Blog for Our Future, Sarah Robinson provides a seminal definition of fasicism from the historian Robert Paxton:
"Fascism is a system of political authority and social order intended to reinforce the unity, energy, and purity of communities in which liberal democracy stands accused of producing division and decline."
Hmm, what does that remind me of?
That is her answer. The VA system works great and so will this. Does that sound like she wanted to hear our concerns? She didn't stick around long enough to hear the man talk about how his father almost died because even though he was sick they told him that they couldn't get him in until September. He called in April. He called his doctor and got him an appointment immediately and found that his father had a massive infection and would be dead inside of a week if he was not hospitalized. That was just ONE of the testimonies.
Barbara called me a bigot in one of the above posts. The post directly above yours has the words lunatic and racist in it.
Now , I agree with you that many people do not understand. I also believe( And I have read parts of HR3200) that having the government compete with private businesses is wrong because the Government can undercut any business it wishes.
Personally, I am against any more government than already is in my health care( I say that because I am on Medicare).
Yes, Medicare has been fine for me so far but I haven't been on it very long.
There is one thing about Medicare that disturbs me. You almost MUST sign up for it. I called the Medicare office and asked if I could not sign up and they said yes I did not have too but if you tried to get your own insurance without having Medicare the the insurance companies may be a bit of a problem for you.
I would prefer that the government sit down with insurance companies and twist some arms( they can do that without interfering with their business).
Terrorists, like it or not, are people who believe they are doing the right thing and feel passionately about their cause. They also feel that anything they do is justified because they have Absolute Right on their side.
And what is terrorism? Here's a dictionary definition:
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.
The mob in Tampa was oblivious to reason. It was just there to intimidate and frighten. That's why some people are calling them terrorists. I think it's a borderline definition, but certainly if this level of mindless hysteria continues, it's going to get worse.
BLACKFLON JUST ADMITTED HE'S ON MEDICARE!!!!!
____
Yeah, and if you think things are bad now, just wait 'til the government gets its hands on medicare.
.
p.s. How much of HR3200 have you yourself read?
That's exactly the kind of debate I'd like to see around health care reform, and yours is exactly the kind of voice I'd like to hear. Though we may disagree, getting our elected officials to respond to challenges like yours is essential to the process of expanding understanding.
The problem--and my central point--is that the protesters are NOT asking reasonable questions, they're shouting officials down. And it begs the question: Why?
So I'm asking you, directly, for your thoughts on this. What ARE these protests about?
"Yes, Medicare has been fine for me so far"
____
My Mother's been on it for more than 20 years. It continues to be fine for her. And, for me, it's no abstraction, because I've been her Attorney-in-Fact since 2004, and handle virtually everything for her (she's now in nursing home care, which Medicare does NOT pay for, btw).
.
I did read the whole post. You wrote,
"I called the Medicare office and asked if I could not sign up and they said yes I did not have too but if you tried to get your own insurance without having Medicare the insurance companies may be a bit of a problem for you."
"The insurance companies may be a bit of a problem for you." It's not the government forcing you, dude. It's the private insurance companies. They do not want to insure you. That's the reason there is Medicare. Before it was signed, millions of seniors had no access to health care because the insurance companies dropped them.
The private insurance companies not only do not want to insure you; they do not want to insure people with pre-existing conditions, or people who have been paying premiums but whose treatments are going to lose them money. They do not want the government to regulate them and make them take customers they don't want to insure. But they don't want a public option that would provide those people with insurance, either, because it would be competition.
That's why some of us want health care reform, and we don't really care a hoo-haw what the private insurance industry wants.
I have seen 3 videos of the Town Hall meetings. In two of them some of the protestors got loud and boisterous because they felt what the speakers were saying was just typical poltical talking points.
I won't say they were out of line because many protests are like this and I see no problem unless they become violent
I saw one video that took place in Dallas with a room full of AARP members. The host pretty much decided didn't want to hear some things and took her microphone and walked out. After that the peopel held their own discussion and talked about their own concerns. Both sides spoke and there was no yelling.
Like I said I believe that some people are confused and some people are not. Maybe because they think some of this is happening too fast.
Here is a link I just found. Maybe this could be an answer. Take a look and let me know what you think.
Barbara , you can look as well.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/abkmhxiginmm
The (private, for-profit) insurance companies may refuse to cover you for costs above and beyond Medicare rates if you are not enrolled in Medicare (a government program that lowers the amount they actually have to pay out).
And you're blaming...the government?
Not the insurance companies?
Please explain how that works.
It makes me genuinely fearful of what's looming. Whither shall we go? Who's gonna die?
What if you don't have a choice. If the public option is made law then WHY would a company continue to pay for your healthcare? They will save money by dropping you from their plan and you will have to enroll into the public option. What if your doctor isn't part of that public option? Then what? The government does NOT have to compete for your business in a public plan so there is no competition. No competition means healthcare that is average at best. If there is no competion there are no external forces driving them to improve it. WILL YOU PEOPLE PLEASE READ THIS PLAN? PLEASE?
Thanks for the link. Read the story. I'd be okay with non-profit cooperatives if that's the compromise position.
But I don't agree that these protests have been reasonable. Here's a link to a Huffpo story (with photos) that shows protesters at a recent Pelosi townhall meeting in Colorado tossing around charges of Nazism and facism. (So who is calling who a facist?)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/07/pelosi-protesters-includi_n_253762.html
I want to see actual debate. I want actual questions, and answers and explanations. But I'm not getting them and neither are you when the debate devolves to this level.
You first. You're not talking about any version of the bill that exists now. You can't possibly have read it.
DJohn, I'm not understanding the logic here. Right now, today, HICs can and do drop people regularly who could cost them money. And HICs are only paying for health care in the aggregate: In theory, you and I are in the majority, we pay our premiums and don't require expensive medical treatment which enables HICs to pay health care costs of those (relatively few) subscribers who DO need it.
But they wiggle out of their obligation to do just that at every turn. For those of us who have to self-pay, the situation is even more dire: One estimate suggested that fully 70 percent of those who purchase their own health insurance will be dropped by the HICs when we need them most.
HICs will still be in business, because there will be plenty of wealthy people who want the option of chosing their physicians or of obtaining medical treatment not deemed necessary under a government plan. I, on the other hand, want the peace of mind that, should I get really ill, I'll be able to get treated without incurring crushing, life-long debt. And I'll take whatever doctor will treat me.
I'm for a single payer system, which I think is what a lot of the protesters are afraid of, except that isn't what's on the table this course. So....why don't we have an actual discussion about what is actually being proposed??
Instead of getting angry at the real culprits and the real problem, people who are equally as impacted as everyone else by our crap medical system are throwing vicious, flaming turds of crazy at the few people attempting to fix the problem. It makes no sense - and that is why it smacks of politics and not policy. That is why people on the left are so flabbergasted by this vitriolic reaction.
The "slow" or "denied" care scenarios that get touted as proof that socialized medical care is evil are happening at this very moment in this very country as private insurance companies repeatedly deny eligible claims just in the hope that the payee will give up. And many people (myself included) are given limited access to specialists (3 visits a year, ma'am), experimental treatments and "elective surgeries" (like mastectomies and hip replacements).
I'm liberal. I'm libertarian. I'm conservative. I'm independent. None of our political parties truly matches my ideology. They don't really match reality, do they? Who fits so neatly into those little boxes? But what DOES matter and what affects us all - in the wallet, if that's all you care about, is when we pay higher premiums, higher costs for medical bills from hospitals, doctors, etc - is our totally fucked up health care "system."
Instead of tearing down the opposition, we need to get our heads together and fix this mess. Because the only folks who like our current system are the insurance companies.
Sigh. I fear it's already too late. I think we are a nation completely divided by hatred and ignorance. I suspect we'll be mired in this red state-blue state bullshit until our empire is completely collapsed. If we can't find a way to agree on something that truly impacts all types of people in a negative way, we have no hope of fixing all our other problems.
Perhaps a trip to the pokey and the hassle of getting sprung would cool their ardor somewhat.
And I really cannot wait for Blackflon to answer Verbal's question.
"(very small voice)
And here we've been told for years that dissent is patriotic..."
That's only when YOUR side is supposedly doing it. Would your anti-healthcare rallies be as "successful" if you didn't have big money backers like Koch Industries and the GOP to bus in the protesters.
BTW, why shouldn't the rest of America have the same health care that my tax dollars pay for you Sgt. son?
Small voice this.
I'm on Tricare, by the way, DG. I pay for it myself, out of my retiree pay, my book royalties and the part-time jobs that I have to work because (surprise!) military retiree pay isn't actually all that generous. (Neither was active duty military pay all that much.)
And I can't speak for anywhere else but San Antonio - but there is no sugar-daddy like the GOP or KOCH picking up the costs of bussing people to anti-Obama health care rallies, town meetings and protests of various sorts. Only volunteers - who are passing the word through websites, blogs, social media and email, and showing up in their own vehicles. With their own hand-made signs, as you might notice.
You wanna put up another straw-man, DG? I'm betting that a lot of the reason that "YOUR side" as you put it so charmingly, is having conniption fits when the shoe is on the other foot- is that the conservative/libertarian/strict constitutional protesters are doing exactly what y'all thought was strictly your prerogative - hey, they aren't supposed to use OUR tactics!! But other people have read Alinsky's Rules for Radicals ... and took careful notes.
I funded my own original mil-blog website through blog-ads, and my own pocket. That's how most people have done it. Blogger, Facebook and Twitter are free. And the group I belong to - we find out about the town-halls locally because some of us signed up with Moveon.org to receive alerts about upcoming events, and others track our local elected officials' announced schedules. Why reinvent the wheel?
How do you know?
As for liberal protestors - I find it interesting that not one of these "grassroots" have been infiltrated by law enforcement or denied access to appearances by Bush and the rest of his miscreants throughout the last 8 years. And when did anti-protesters ever threaten violence? You've got nothing and you don't even know what you're protesting.
What Sgt. Mom doesn't get is that there's a big difference between discussion and intimidation. The right-wing goons showing up at townhall meetings are there to break them up and intimidate people who don't agree with them, not to take part in democratic discussion.
I've been arguing for years with other lefties about stupid stuff I've seen at anti-war protests, like vulgar signs and stupid costumes, but I have never heard a leftie threaten to shoot those who disagree with him.
I say again, there's plenty of stuff in the various health reform provisions being considered about which reasonable people can disagree, and which we all ought to be discussing sensibly. But the Right isn't having it. We can't have any kind of discussion until people learn to sit down, shut up, and listen to each other.
We've only been in existence since March, so we rather missed any chance to protest at GWB's appearances. We have invited the FBI to come to our meetings, though. They can infiltrate us any time. So can you, as a matter of fact. Alternate Sunday afternoons, 3 PM at the Magic Time Machine, Broadway and 410.
"After the event, things got really out of control. The SEIU members were looking for trouble. They roamed the parking lot like a pack of thugs. Conservative Kenneth Gladney, who is black, was passing out “Don’t Tread on Me” flags and tea party buttons to the taxpayers at the school. Unfortunately for Kenneth, the SEIU members were not happy that a black man was passing out tea party buttons. Kenneth’s lawyer described what happened next:
The SEIU member used a racial slur against Kenneth, then punched him in the face. Kenneth fell to the ground. Another SEIU member yelled racial epithets at Kenneth as he kicked him in the head and back. Kenneth was also brutally attacked by one other male SEIU member and an unidentified woman. The three men were clearly SEIU members, as they were wearing T-shirts with the SEIU logo.
The three SEIU members were arrested at the scene. Kenneth was hurt badly and taken to the emergency room, where he was treated for his numerous injuries. We all hope that he recovers quickly from this vicious attack.
Tomorrow, Saturday, the St. Louis Tea Party Coalition is holding a rally at the local SEIU headquarters. We are going to demand justice for Kenneth Gladney, who was brutally beaten on Thursday night. The St. Louis Coalition will request that the NAACP and the ACLU come out in support of Kenneth Gladney’s rights which were trampled by the union hooligans."
We don't do confrontation, threats and violence, and our organization policy is very much against it - have been from the first. We have had quite reasonable dialogues at many of our protests and meetings with politicians and fellow citizens who had a different take on the matter at hand - but in the main, we managed to find common ground.
But three SEIU goons beating up one of ours ... I think you would have to admit, that is reason for making an exception. YMMV, of course.
Then either your organization is completely unconnected to the other organizations getting people to townhall meetings, or you are not being honest.
Yep.
Interestingly, I discussed this particular quote in a recent post:
That's the reason there is Medicare. Before it was signed, millions of seniors had no access to health care because the insurance companies dropped them.
You are actually right about this assessment.
Fear of a Red Planet (Socialism isn't Communism--Really!)
As a side note, I find it interesting that many people on the right have been very vocal against any kind of governmental programs. However, when they turn 65 (or 67 for social security) nobody is refusing to be covered by Medicare (only Blackflon it seems, although he did work very hard at it).
Epochal change is ALWAYS emotional so that's not really the story. What you have missed are two points: First, these protestors are, in almost all cases, not constituents of the Congressperson holding the town hall meeting; they are bussed in from other districts for the express purpose of shutting it down rather than to be heard on health care reform. Second, these shout-downs are all aimed at Democratic congresspersons, not Republicans. These are not organic protests. They aren't even protests. They are planned and orchestrated riots.
Nice chatting with you, but I see that your mind is already made up, now that you are descending to insults. Obviously you are having a lot of fun here - sort of like a kid at a summertime campfire telling ghost stories to the others - "Ooogah boogha - look out for those evil astro-turfing reactionary riot-staging tea-baggers!" Far from me to discourage you from deriving thrills 'n' chills, painting ordinary, concerned citizens as some kind of incipient brown-shirt, terrorist army - but everyone needs a hobby. This appears to be yours, so you just go on having fun.
But do check out a local Tea Party meeting or event sometime - and see for yourself. Don't just depend on the legacy media or your favorite blogs to tell you all about it. Go out sometime, and see for yourself.
I realize what your respective points are regarding the organization, structure and goals of these protests/riots/what have you. I still believe that concentrating too much on that is to be concerned with the symptom while the underlying disease still exists.
I still feel the depth of emotions (regardless of their genesis or ostensible manipulation) is where the concern should lie. It is those emotions that will be the engine behind other actions, whether they be civil, legal or neither. Prevention of any possibly dangerous escalation will be in soothing those emotions, not exposing the tactics.
I'm glad that the Democrats in Congress, though, have aspired to a bipartisan bill. This resolution is too important to be hurriedly cobbled together by 20-something interns and then passed purely on momentum by congressmen/women who haven't even had a chance to read it yet.
And I'm still hoping and praying that at some point somebody will make even a meager stab at including tort reform in all of this.
It never talks about tort reform and uses words like "non traditional citizen". It is amazing to me that so many have taken a stand either for or against, yet none of us know what this bill really offers. We should be shouting for a line by line, paragraph by paragraph explantaion so there could be clarity and specifics given to all of us that will be paying for this. It does seem true that one needs a law degree to decifer the wording of this 1000 page monster.
Forty-eight percent (48%) of U.S. voters now rate the U.S. health care system as good or excellent. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 19% rate it as poor.
Seventy-four percent (74%) of voters rate the quality of care they receive as good or excellent. In May, just 62% of adults said the same.
Sixty-one percent (61%) of voters nationwide say that cost is the biggest health care problem facing the nation today. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 21% believe the lack of universal health insurance coverage is a bigger problem.
Only 10% believe the quality of care is the top concern, and two percent (2%) point to the inconvenience factor of dealing with the current medical system.
Given a choice between health care reform and a tax hike or no health care reform and no tax hike, 47% would prefer to avoid the tax hike and do without reform. Forty-one percent (41%) take the opposite view.
The opposition is stronger when asked about a choice between health care reform that would require changing existing health insurance coverage or no health care reform and no change from current coverage. In that case, voters oppose reform by a 54% to 32% margin.
Lorimarie -- there isn't any one bill yet. There is a House bill, but no Senate bill, and once there's a Senate bill there will be a reconciliation bill, and nobody knows what's going to be in that.
The House bill is online and you can read it all you like. Yes, it's a pain in the ass to read, but no more so than anything else Congress cranks out. (I take it a lot of peole have never tried to read a congressional bill before. I have; they're all like this.) If you find any part of it utterly baffling, refer to the summary.