Health Reform: Hope & Foreboding
Terry Rosell, DMin, PhD March 24, 2010
What happened Sunday evening, March 21, 2010, in the U.S. House of Representatives was shameful, on the one hand, and incremental justice-making, on the other.
Shameful? I’m referring to legislators’ behaviors that engaged bumper-sticker sloganeering (“Cornhusker Kickback”), childish repetitiveness (“. . . this flawed bill”), name-calling (“Baby-killer”), and tit-for-tat posturing for the party leadership. Instead of true debate—involving reasoned response to an opponent’s arguments—this process involved overt partisanship that had little to do with healthcare legislation and everything to do with political will to power.
My 18 year old son, with vocational aspirations that might include law and politics, watched the C-Span coverage with me for awhile. In the midst of “debate,” he turned to me with wide eyes, clearly disappointed, and asked, “Is this for real? Do they really act this way in Congress?” I felt ashamed of my generation of lawmakers.
Or of some. Others in Washington last weekend chose to work more reasonably toward an incremental change in the way healthcare insurance works in a system that has been flawed or broken far too long. Our infamous three tiers (the Haves, Have-Somes, and Have-Nots) are shifting to something more like two, with fewer of us being left out entirely. Fixing insurance gaps and abuses is a big deal, and those who struck a deal to do so are to be commended—or mostly so.
I regret that all of this divided down party lines, and that a few “Tea Party” demonstrators outside the Capitol treated disrespectfully and even criminally several of our most distinguished legislators. I worry that legislation passed will get hung up in further stalling tactics, court cases, state constitutional amendments, and legislative challenges. I anticipate a backlash from those already raging against this show of democratic process, such as it is, who fear that they will lose if others gain, who desperately grasp at power and control.
While this major step toward a more just healthcare system gives many of us hope, it also leaves me with a sense of foreboding that we have not seen the end of Congressional and civilian incivility. With midterm elections just around the corner, the shameful behaviors witnessed in Washington recently may be just the beginning. I hope not.
Shameful? I’m referring to legislators’ behaviors that engaged bumper-sticker sloganeering (“Cornhusker Kickback”), childish repetitiveness (“. . . this flawed bill”), name-calling (“Baby-killer”), and tit-for-tat posturing for the party leadership. Instead of true debate—involving reasoned response to an opponent’s arguments—this process involved overt partisanship that had little to do with healthcare legislation and everything to do with political will to power.
My 18 year old son, with vocational aspirations that might include law and politics, watched the C-Span coverage with me for awhile. In the midst of “debate,” he turned to me with wide eyes, clearly disappointed, and asked, “Is this for real? Do they really act this way in Congress?” I felt ashamed of my generation of lawmakers.
Or of some. Others in Washington last weekend chose to work more reasonably toward an incremental change in the way healthcare insurance works in a system that has been flawed or broken far too long. Our infamous three tiers (the Haves, Have-Somes, and Have-Nots) are shifting to something more like two, with fewer of us being left out entirely. Fixing insurance gaps and abuses is a big deal, and those who struck a deal to do so are to be commended—or mostly so.
I regret that all of this divided down party lines, and that a few “Tea Party” demonstrators outside the Capitol treated disrespectfully and even criminally several of our most distinguished legislators. I worry that legislation passed will get hung up in further stalling tactics, court cases, state constitutional amendments, and legislative challenges. I anticipate a backlash from those already raging against this show of democratic process, such as it is, who fear that they will lose if others gain, who desperately grasp at power and control.
While this major step toward a more just healthcare system gives many of us hope, it also leaves me with a sense of foreboding that we have not seen the end of Congressional and civilian incivility. With midterm elections just around the corner, the shameful behaviors witnessed in Washington recently may be just the beginning. I hope not.
Link: Podcast, Health Reform: An Ethical Analysis, The Bioethics Channel, March 23, 19 minutes 17 seconds
Labels: health reform; healthcare reform; medical ethics; end of life
posted by Practical Bioethics at
8:41 AM
1 Comments:
I found this column quite disturbing for its partisanship and hypocrisy. The Cornhusker Kickback, Louisiana Purchase and other back room deals were the shameful part of this process. This is a seriously flawed bill. Rather than work together and find common ground to care for those who truly need it, we saw an abuse of power to gain even more power. Those who said "start over" were labled as obstructionist do nothings who don't care about others. To call this bill incremental change is just blatantly false, unless your end goal is a truly socialist (government run) health system. I believe there are many conservatives and others who opposed this bill, but who support improving access to care and lowering costs. It was clear from the start that our voices weren't being heard, or just didn't matter. When your voice isn't heard, you tend to shout a little louder.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home