Share

Selective Deficit Disorder

by: David Sirota, t r u t h o u t | Perspective

photo
As many Americans advocate for a "public option," conservatives are using deficit-based arguments to combat the idea. (Photo: Sage Ross / flickr)

    Watching the health care debate unfold these days is a little like watching scenes from "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" — the ones showing a collage of strung-out, deranged or otherwise incapacitated patients rotting away in a squalid psychiatric ward.

    As the insurance industry's Nurse Ratched lurks in the background, congressional Democrats cower in the corner, fearing the phantom menace of their own shadows. Standing next to the window, suicidal Republican leaders rant about "death panels" and threaten to splatter their electoral prospects onto the pavement below. Nearby, White House officials struggle with multiple-personality ailments as they mumble contradictory statements about the public option. Meanwhile, tea party protesters lie on the floor in a fetal position, soiling their hospital diapers as they throw incoherent tantrums about everything from socialism to communism to czarism to Nazism. And, not surprisingly, Washington reporters just stare off into the distance, having been long ago lobotomized in the wake of their Watergate heyday.

    Clearly, the inmates in America's political sanitarium are each struggling with different maladies. However, they are all suffering from Selective Deficit Disorder - an illness whose symptoms can be particularly difficult to detect.

    When we see tea party activists bemoan deficit spending or watch rank-and-file senators like Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., say, "I'm not going to vote for a (health care) bill that's not deficit-neutral," it is easy to think these poor souls are perfectly healthy. When President Obama promises to "not sign a (health) plan that adds one dime to our deficit" and then New York Times writers such as David Brooks praise this "dime standard" as the epitome of "pragmatism" and "fiscal sanity," these victims seem absolutely sane.

    Yet, Selective Deficit Disorder is a sickness of omission. Attacking the neural synapses that maintain rudimentary logic, it presents itself not in what its carriers say and do, but in what they refuse to say and do.

    Where, for instance, were conservative organizations marching on Washington when President Bush vastly expanded the deficit with his massive tax cuts for the wealthy? Where was Senator Lincoln's concern for "deficit neutrality" when she voted to give $700 billion to the thieves on Wall Street? Where was Obama's "dime standard" when he proposed a budget that spends far more on maintaining bloated Pentagon budgets than on any universal health care proposal being considered in Congress? Where were demands for "fiscal sanity" by Brooks and other right-wing pundits when they cheered on the budget-busting war in Iraq? Where were any calls for raising taxes from these supposed "deficit hawks" when they backed all this profligate spending? And where were the journalists asking such painfully simple questions?

    They were nowhere, because those plagued by Selective Deficit Disorder (as the name suggests) are only selectively worried about deficits.

    When it comes to spending on priorities like health care reform that would help ordinary Americans, the illness's victims scream about deficits and overspending. But when it comes to handing over trillions of dollars to financial firms, defense contractors and other corporate interests, deficits suddenly don't matter to the disease-addled politicians, protestors and journalists underwritten by those interests.

    Luckily, while almost every significant voice in politics is stricken with Selective Deficit Disorder, the majority of the country's citizens are not. That doesn't mean Americans love unbalanced budgets, of course. It just means we know there is something very wrong with those who decry deficit spending on health care for millions of people, but ignore far bigger deficit expenditures on giveaways to a tiny handful of fat cats.

    Now, all we have to do is stop flying over the cuckoo's nest and start breaking into the asylum...

  

»


David Sirota is the author of the best-selling books "Hostile Takeover" and "The Uprising." He hosts the morning show on AM760 in Colorado and blogs at OpenLeft.com. E-mail him at ds@davidsirota.com.

Comments

This is a moderated forum. Β It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

Much of the media is

Much of the media is reporting that "people are dying because they lack health insurance." That's untrue - they're dying because they lack health CARE. Why have a mandate that forces citizens to give up to 13% of their income to insurance companies for something that may not actually provide the health care they need? And don't we first need to define health care? Is it a right or a priviledge? A requirement to purchase health INSURANCE doesn't answer that question - it suggests that citizens have a duty to obtain health care insurance to avoid becoming a burden on society.

Added to the need to quash

Added to the need to quash the single payer or universal heath care or even the public option beyond the vast savings afforded to those who squander health and fortune aka Corporate interests is the simple fact that providing an employee, a worker, with a more elastic ability to transfer out from under an abusive employer threatens corporate control everywhere. This may be at the core of the sponsorship of Fox's teabagger rebellion. Like the Supreme Court deciding to consider corporations like an individual, Corporations here are masquerading as the common man. They want to control the common man and would prefer indentured servitude, non union and sweat shop conditions for a population dependent on the "company store."

The Public Option is junk.

The Public Option is junk. Why is it such a big deal. Maybe it will offer rates 10% lower, but doesn't solve the problem of costs that are twice that of other nations with a falling national income. Even supporters say it may cover just 5% of the public. Just drop and expand Medicaid, the true public option. Perhaps middle income people can pay a monthly affordable fee.

The US has already spent

The US has already spent MORE on Iraq and Afghanistan alone than would be required to implement a single-payer health system! The current so-called health reform legislation would be a huge windfall for the insurance industry. The disease is rampant in Washington, proportionally worse than AIDS. Obama most certainly has it as well as most Republicans. And I suspect it's communicable. Anyone getting in bed with the health insurance or financial industry seems to have it (?)

Once again David Sirota has

Once again David Sirota has hit the nail on the head. However, it is not a question of breaking into the asylum, it is how do we keep them locked up and away from rest of us with their poison and their stupidity? Perhaps we could just barricade DC behind a big wall, and go about passing useful health care reform at the state level, and then as a passing thought let the inmates have their corporate coverage instead of taxpayer supported coverage. Watch the tune change then!

It is pretty simple. Spend

It is pretty simple. Spend on fellow Americans' health or spend on fellow Americans' death (by taxes, war and greed). Only the cowards vote to spend on the latter. They are afraid of change and they think they will lose something. The courageous vote on the former. They welcome change and the inclusion of all countrymen in benefits that should be shared by all.

I am glad to hear someone

I am glad to hear someone saying he has some confidence in the American people and their ability to come to terms with and find solutions to the problems that seem to assault us on every hand. I do too.

David deserves kudos for

David deserves kudos for this tragically-funny column on the health care debate. ALL the characterizations are right on target. Only thing I can't figure out is why he ended it suggesting that we should "break into the asylum..." And why, exactly, would we want to do that, even if we could? Perhaps a more appropriate conclusion would have suggested that we go get the pitchforks and torches.

Great commentary. But, how

Great commentary. But, how do we get through to congress with the republithugs, homeland security and blackwater and the american media coming after us. We have our own brownshirts.

Thank you for saying what I

Thank you for saying what I have been saying all along. Health care costs something! Why on earth have these idiots promised that it won't? They want to send 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan. That is more important than American health care? How did the Republicans convince Obama that health care with a price tag wouldn't sell? I don't get it and I'm glad to see it pointed out.

Couple that with all of

Couple that with all of Obama's and Pelosi's lies and contradictions, and it seems that no one in government is qualified to "reform" health care. Of course, this should not be any surprise based on the way they have handled Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and the Veterans Administration. All they want is power and control. We should take a lesson from Tom Clancy's "Executive Orders" and get rid of the entire lot of current representatives and elect those who have proper qualifications and no political experience.

I seem to recall one of the

I seem to recall one of the arguments for mandatory auto insurance was that it would lower every one's premiums since we would no longer be carrying the weight of the uninsured driver. I've heard the same argument being advanced for health insurance. I don't remember my auto insurance going down.

you missed something, all

you missed something, all they want is to please the "health care" industry who fills their coffers. As long as these HMOs and PPOs are able to yank away insurance when you get a serious illness, we have CEOs deciding who lives and who dies so they can buy luxury homes and gold dinnerware and personal jets. They end more American lives than the Taliban.

I adamantly support health

I adamantly support health care reform and it is disturbing to hear the my-way-or-no-way attitude of the extreme left and extreme right. But what happened to idea of canceling the huge trillion $ tax cuts Bush & Republicans pushed through for their rich friends? Wouldn't that pay for all of the health care reform costs and then some?

I downloaded and read H.R.

I downloaded and read H.R. 676 in about half an hour. It is not even close to 1000 pages (or even 100 for that matter), it is simple, clear, and absolutely the very best of all the bills currently circulating Congress. You can download it from Dennis Kucinich's website. This is the bill we MUST get behind. Everything else is garbage. I guess this is why I have never heard it mentioned on the MSM stations, and by that I'm starting to include the news shows on PBS. I encourage everyone to read this bill. The solution is so simple and straightforward! It has been there all along!

While we are preparing a

While we are preparing a deficit neutral health care bill, we are spending billions of borrowed money every day on two big wars in the middle east. Why was no one worried about this when we started those wars? If 18,000 people die each year because of our bad healthcare system, it seems to me someone should do a cost/benefit analysis for funding wars and funding healthcare.

NBC Sep18, 2009: Harvard

NBC Sep18, 2009: Harvard study 45,OOO DEATHS IN THE USA A YEAR = 1/12 minures-- DUE T NO HEALTH INSURANCE!!! This is more than homicide or drunk driving combined. Private insurance = B$ceos profits death panels.

In all the debate and

In all the debate and blather about health care and health care insurance, there are simple facts and truths that should be stated and discussed and restated until they begin to help clarify some of the issues. Here are two examples: 1. The national deficit is NOT remotely like your household deficit. The country will not "go bankrupt" like a household can. It may get into financial trouble but not the same way an individual or a family can. 2. Medicare is NOT FREE. Participants pay a monthly premium and there are fairly stiff copays (which is why people purchase supplemental insurance). Teabag fans often seem to think folks are getting something for free, a view encouraged by some of the reform opponents. Maybe if facts like this were more publicized there might be less opposition to change.

The American conservatives

The American conservatives didn't march on Washington because Rush, etc. told them that the tax cuts were GOOD FOR AMERICA. Anyone who said differently was no better than the terrorists, and "you're either with us, or against us."

The rabel rousers have more

The rabel rousers have more voice to the public than those speaking facts and truth. Eventually, as the price of health insurance continues to rise and the number of people without health insurance grows, the truth will out. Unfortunately, Rush and Palin will not have to answer for their lies and duplicity.

A caller to C-SPAN last week

A caller to C-SPAN last week claimed that Blue Cross/Blue Shield had just increased her health insurance premium by 33% in anticipation of having to cover those with pre-existing conditions. If this is true, it is blackmail. In our state insurance plan everyone is required to participate. A young man claimed that his premium was too high because it covered older, more needy, individuals. If he was correct, adding those currently uninsured should decrease the price. (By the way, age is a pre-existing conditiion.)

It is true that people

It is true that people protesting spending now should also protest spending by Republicans. However, that does not mean that deficit spending is good.

"All they want is power and

"All they want is power and control. We should take a lesson from Tom Clancy's "Executive Orders" and get rid of the entire lot of current representatives and elect those who have proper qualifications and no political experience." -- Anonymous Perhaps, we ought to take a lesson from Andrew M. Lobaczewski and *then* consider the merits of your statement.

I think it's pretty obvious

I think it's pretty obvious that some compromises are going to have to be made to get any kind of progress done on this issue. I think the easiest way to get the ball rolling is to lower the Medicare age to 55 and then gradually lower it from there. There's no new bureaucracy to create although we might have to expand the existing one to handle the load, and we can take the time to analyze the effects and make the system even more cost efficient as experience dictates and by going after the frauds and cheats like we really mean it. It will remove the highest cost consumers from the insurance pool and theoretically lower costs for the rest of us. That's half a pie and a foot in the door to me... and it might just work.

Negativism doesn't help

Negativism doesn't help solve problems. I wish all you posters would keep that in mind. Don't insult each other and do comment in ways that will further the debate rather then stifle dialogue. That said, healthcare reform that includes a public option or is single payer would be DEFICIT POSITIVE! The US pays more, collectively, for healthcare than any other industrialized nation, and gets poorer results, check US life expectancy and infant mortality as compared to other nations. As a percentage of GDP, the cost of healthcare would go WAY down if we had the gov't handle it. Administrative cost of Medicare is 3% of revenues, a figure that private insurers, who want to make a profit (that's what capitalism is all about) don't want to compete against. While the costs of single payer healthcare would increase the gov't budget a little, it would be much cheaper overall than the current system. One of the problems US auto manufacturers had is that they were competing with other countries that have universal healthcare and thus had lower labor costs. There is a lot of disinformation out there but the bottom line is that if people unite and pool their resources they can have a better quality of life.