Fear, Anger, Hope and Inspiration will Decide Health Care Battle

by Robert Creamer

Robert Creamer is a long-time political organizer and strategist and author of the recent book: "Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win," available on amazon.com.

The details of policy will not decide the outcome of the health care reform battle. In fact, the policy outcome itself will be decided largely by the interplay of four emotions that will drive the outcome of this essentially political battle: fear, anger, hope and inspiration.

The principal weapon of those who want to maintain the status quo is, as always, fear. The Republicans and their allies in the private health insurance industry are cranking up the fear machine like the producers of a good horror movie. They warn of a "government takeover of health care," "socialized medicine," "rationing" and the ever-frightening prospect that a "government bureaucrat" might stand between someone and her doctor - or a needed medical treatment.

Of course fear need not be rational. I talked to a Blue Dog Democrat the other day - one who favors a strong public option - who told of scores of calls his office has received from older voters on Medicare, the government run health care program for the elderly and disabled. The callers were frightened of a "government takeover" of medicine. Former Senator John Breaux once told a story about a woman who rushed up to him in the airport to plead with him to "keep government out of her Medicare."

Fear immobilizes. And fear of the unknown crushes the desire for change, even in the midst of conditions that cry out for change. It has been used throughout history by those who profit from the status quo, and it becomes especially important when - as is the case with health care today - most people believe that the current system should in fact be changed.

Of course the insurance companies and the Right are not just using fear to move public opinion. Just as importantly, they are using it to frighten key Members of Congress into believing that an angry mobilized part of their constituency - and donors - will exact political retribution. For some Blue Dog Democrats that fear is being used to mask the fact the President Obama's health care proposals will produce some of their most profound benefits precisely within the districts they represent. In one notable case, the district has 150,000 uninsured citizens and only 900 families who would pay a surtax used to pay the costs of the House Democratic Health Care bill.

Anger, on the other hand, does not immobilize like fear. It energizes action. In politics, anger is almost always a necessary precursor to change and hope. American voters would not have been willing to take a chance on the change and hope offered by the Obama campaign in 2008 if they were not already furious with the administration of George W. Bush and its failed stewardship of our economy and foreign policy. That anger stemmed from the sense that everyday people could no longer look forward to better lives in the future. Obama resolved that anger into the hope that change could bring them a better life.

The powerful elements that dominate the Republican Party and the Conservative Movement also focus the anger of people who feel they are losing control or have been passed by, but instead of resolving anger into hope, they resolve anger into fear of change - and fear of people who "aren't like them."

To win the battle over health care - and all of the other major battles required to fulfill the promise of change - Progressives must engage the anger of most Americans and do a better job mobilizing that anger than our right-wing opponents.

That means a populist message. It means focusing in on the insurance executives who are perfectly willing to deny health care to sick people so that they can make millions and millions of dollars and retire with massive golden parachutes. It means we need to frame the debate as a struggle between those with power -- and the majority of Americans.

And it means that, for Members of Congress, we have to channel that anger to induce fear-the fear that failure to accomplish change will be more politically costly that voting for reform. In the end, the winning message to most Members of Congress is that health insurance reform IS the high political ground. That is the message we must deliver to every Member over the August recess in no uncertain terms.

Hope and change will not win out if we don't engage populist anger. But success also requires that we paint a clear, positive picture of a future where ordinary Americans no longer have to worry that they may not have access to health care.

People aren't engaged and motivated by statistics or "policies." The prospect of an "insurance exchange" will not inspire people to take a risk on change. To win this battle we need to get people to imagine what it would be like if they no longer had to worry that if they got sick and then lost their job, they might also lose their health care. We have to remind them that 14,000 people are losing their health insurance every day- and they could be next. They have to visualize the insurance company CEO who gets the $73 million golden parachute and received a salary of $5,585 an hour ($12.2. million per year).

In fact, to win this - or any other major political battle - we need to remember that changing people's opinions and motivating them into action is mainly about engaging their emotions - hope, fear, anger, inspiration. That means we need to make the issues at stake palpable. People need to experienced them in the concrete, not as abstract concepts. They need to be turned into images, stories and symbols that can make people see, feel, hear and taste the issues, not just think about them.

That brings us to inspiration. President Obama's ability to inspire is an enormous political asset. Being inspired is basically the feeling of empowerment - empowerment to overcome odds - to overcome fear. In the same way a blast furnace turns iron ore and coke into steel, inspiration transforms fear and anger into hope.

We need to inspire the country that change is possible and will bring about a better health care system. We need to inspire Members of Congress that they can overcome their fear of insurance companies and special interests, and make history. We need to keep our own base inspired in order to keep them mobilized.

In fact, our ability to compete with the insurance companies and the merchants of fear is entirely contingent on our ability to keep our base engaged and energized. That is one of the critical reasons why, in order to be successful, a health insurance reform plan must include a strong public health insurance option.

A strong public option is critically necessary to accomplish the Administration's goals of controlling health care costs by competing with private insurance companies, driving down rates and keeping them honest. That is why the insurance industry hates the proposal.

But a public option is also critical because it inspires our base. Like it or not, most Progressives in America have lost faith in the private health insurance industry and its ability to provide health care at reasonable prices for all Americans. Many Americans joined the Obama campaign because they believed he - and they together -- could make change in general, and change in the health care system in particular.

The public option has become a symbol for most of these activists - the symbol of what defines real change. If the small band of insurance company-friendly Democrats forces the entire Party and the Administration to abandon this critical element of the Obama plan, the campaign for health care reform will lose much of its ability to inspire activists to action. That would leave the playing field to Rush Limbaugh and his insurance industry friends who use fear to mobilize the right-wing base.

Progressives cannot afford to fail in our battle for health insurance reform. It is a critical building block for the long-term economic success of our country. It will also define for millions of Americans whether they can make change - whether they can take the future into their own hands and make their own history. Our success in the health care battle will in great measure determine our ability to continue to generate the kind of inspiration that is so critical to our ability to win all of the battles that lie ahead.


Robert Creamer's recent book: "Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win," available onamazon.com.

Browse articles by author

More Current Affairs

Added 19.06.2018
 

I find it exceptionally irritating when I hear liberals worry about whether Israel will be able to remain a "Jewish and Democratic State" if it retains control of occupied Palestinian lands.

Added 18.06.2018
Daniel Wagner: "My prediction Korean War will be formally ended, the peninsula will be denuclearised, and a lasting peace will be the result."
Added 14.06.2018
Extract: PiS [ the ruling Law and Justice party] has established the most significant addition to the Polish social safety net since 1989: the Family 500+ program. Launched in 2016, Family 500+ embodies the nationalism, traditional family values, and social consciousness that the PiS seeks to promote. The program pays families 500 złoty ($144) per month to provide care for a second or subsequent child...........The program has been enormously popular. Some 2.4 million families took advantage of it in the first two years. The benefit, equivalent to 40% of the minimum wage, has almost wiped out extreme poverty for children in Poland, reducing it by an estimated 70-80%........... Liberal pro-European politicians and policymakers are not convinced. They complain that such a generous family benefit will weaken work incentives and blow up the government budget. But initial evidence suggests that Family 500+ has actually increased economic activity. It has also reversed the post-communist decline in fertility, increased wages (particularly for women), and enabled families to buy school materials, take vacations, buy more clothes for their kids, and rely less on high-priced credit for basic household needs. And, thanks to rapid economic growth, the government deficit has steadily fallen, not grown.
Added 12.06.2018
The depths of hypocrisy of the Republican Party in supporting Trump’s meeting with the North Korean dictator in Singapore are hard to plumb. This is a party whose leading members adopted the Ostrich Foreign Policy Principle for decades. If you don’t like a country’s government or political and economic system, pretend it does not exist.
Added 12.06.2018
US Defense Secretary Jim Mattis has spoken out against China’s strategy of “intimidation and coercion” in the South China Sea, including the deployment of anti-ship missiles, surface-to-air missiles, and electronic jammers, and, more recently, the landing of nuclear-capable bomber aircraft at Woody Island. There are, Mattis warned, “consequences to China ignoring the international community.” But what consequences?
Added 12.06.2018
With a general election approaching in September, Swedish voters are being warned that now it’s their turn to be targeted by Russian interference in the democratic process. According to Sweden’s Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB), which is leading the country’s efforts to counter foreign-influence operations, such interference is very likely, and citizens should be on the lookout for disinformation and fake news.
Added 11.06.2018
Extract: "While the presidency has grown stronger over the years, during the Trump administration Congress has been timid and subordinate. That is because the leaders of the Republican Party – which controls both the House of Representatives and the Senate – are frightened of Trump’s base. They cannot afford to alienate the roughly 30-35% of Americans who passionately back him, ignore his personal transgressions, tolerate his degradation of the country’s civil discourse, favor his brutal treatment of immigrant families, and don’t mind that he is leaving the US almost friendless in the world."
Added 08.06.2018
Has North Korea’s ruler, Kim Jong-un, made a strategic decision to trade away his nuclear program, or is he just engaged in another round of deceptive diplomacy, pretending that he will denuclearize in exchange for material benefits for his impoverished country? This is, perhaps, the key question in the run-up to the summit between Kim and US President Donald Trump in Singapore on June 12. Until then, no one will know the answer, perhaps not even Kim himself.
Added 07.06.2018
Some analysts even project that, before long, Facebook will hold more data on its users than any government. Meanwhile, it makes a lot of money from this data. Its advertising revenues came up to around US$40 billion in 2017 (up 50% from 2016). With Google, it holds an 84% market share in online advertising.
Added 05.06.2018
Roseanne Barr is an American comedian whose fictional TV character of the same name is a working-class Trump supporter. For those who remember the show “All in the Family,” she might be usefully compared to Archie Bunker, the crude proletarian patriarch from Queens, New York. Barr’s show was swiftly canceled late last month by the television network ABC, not for anything her “character” said in her show, but for a tweet in which she described Valerie Jarrett, an African-American former adviser to Barack Obama, as the offspring of the Muslim Brotherhood and “Planet of the Apes.”
Added 04.06.2018
 

When Donald Trump was elected, I, like many others feared what his presidency might do to the country. A year and a half into his term in office, our concerns have been justified. 

Added 01.06.2018
Extract from the article: "While the West’s relative decline is almost inevitable, its economic dysfunction is not. Yet pessimism can be self-fulfilling. Why undertake difficult reforms if a dark future seems preordained? As a result, accepting and anxious pessimists tend to elect governments that duck difficult decisions (witness Germany’s grand coalition), while angry pessimists make matters worse (by voting for Donald Trump’s “America First” agenda or for Brexit, for example). It doesn’t have to be this way. As French President Emmanuel Macron has demonstrated, bold leaders can succeed with a message of hope, openness, and inclusion, and by promoting a vision of progress based on credible reforms."
Added 30.05.2018
It has been nearly two years since the United Kingdom narrowly voted in favor of leaving the European Union. As the march toward Brexit – formally set for the end of next March – proceeds, fundamental questions about the nature of the future UK-EU relationship remain unanswered. Instead, every time a tough decision must be made in the negotiations in Brussels, British ministers kick the can down the road, or even into the long grass. This is somewhat surprising. Apparently, none of the politicians and newspaper editors who plotted for years to get the UK out of the EU thought much about what would happen if their machinations succeeded.
Added 30.05.2018
Discussions are now underway to establish a system of joint deposit insurance for eurozone banks. Proponents of the scheme, with the European Commission and the European Central Bank (ECB) taking the lead, point out that deposit insurance would avert the danger of a run on banks in times of crisis. While this argument is true, critics emphasize the disparity in risks, owing to the high share of bad loans on the balance sheets of banks in some countries. To address this risk disparity and move ahead with the plan, balance sheets will need to be cleaned up before considering the next step. While the share of bad loans for banks in the stable eurozone countries is just 2%, the most recently published International Monetary Fund statistics, from last April, show a share of 11% for Ireland, 16% for Italy, 40% for Cyprus, and 46% for Greece.
Added 29.05.2018
Trump’s decision cannot be justified by any breach of the agreement on Iran’s part. It is, rather, a return to the old, largely unsuccessful US policy of confrontation with Iran. The only difference this time is that the Trump administration seems determined to go to the brink of war – or even beyond – to get its way. If the administration has any plans for keeping Iran’s nuclear program in check in the absence of the nuclear deal, then it is keeping them a secret. Judging by some of the administration’s rhetoric, it would appear that airstrikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities are on the table. But bombing would only delay Iran’s nuclear program, not stop it. Would Trump then consider a massive ground war to occupy the country and topple the regime? We know all too well how that strategy worked the last time it was tried.
Added 28.05.2018
US President Donald Trump’s abrupt decision to cancel his planned June 12 summit with Kim Jong-un represents a diplomatic coup for the North Korean leader, and an even bigger victory for China. In the space of just a few months, Kim’s image has gone from that of international pariah to that of thwarted peacemaker.
Added 23.05.2018
The good news is that the United States and China appear to have backed away from the precipice of a trade war. While vague in detail, a May 19 agreement defuses tension and commits to further negotiation. The bad news is that the framework of negotiations is flawed: A deal with any one country will do little to resolve America’s fundamental economic imbalances that have arisen in an interconnected world.
Added 21.05.2018
The cryptocurrency revolution, which started with bitcoin in 2009, claims to be inventing new kinds of money. There are now nearly 2,000 cryptocurrencies, and millions of people worldwide are excited by them. What accounts for this enthusiasm, which so far remains undampened by warnings that the revolution is a sham? One must bear in mind that attempts to reinvent money have a long history. As the sociologist Viviana Zelizer points out in her book The Social Meaning of Money: “Despite the commonsense idea that ‘a dollar is a dollar is a dollar,’ everywhere we look people are constantly creating different kinds of money.” Many of these innovations generate real excitement, at least for a while. As the medium of exchange throughout the world, money, in its various embodiments, is rich in mystique. We tend to measure people’s value by it. It sums things up like nothing else. And yet it may consist of nothing more than pieces of paper that just go round and round in circles of spending. So its value depends on belief and trust in those pieces of paper. One might call it faith.
Added 19.05.2018
The protests that rippled across Russia ahead of Vladimir Putin’s fourth inauguration as president followed a familiar script. Police declared the gatherings illegal, and the media downplayed their size. Alexey Navalny, the main organizer and Russia’s de facto opposition leader, was arrested in dramatic fashion, dragged out of a rally in Moscow by police. On May 15, he was sentenced to 30 days in prison. More than 1,600 protesters across the country were beaten and detained.
Added 16.05.2018
Many knowledgeable people dismiss the prospect of advanced AGI [=Artificial General Intelligence]. Some, ..........,argue that it is impossible for AI to outsmart humanity........Yet other distinguished scholars........do worry that AGI could pose a serious or even existential threat to humanity. With experts lining up on both sides of the debate, the rest of us should keep an open mind.