Obama’s Attempt at a Bipartisan Health-Care Summit

by Valerie Elverton Dixon 02-11-2010

President Obama has scheduled a bipartisan meeting on health-care reform that will be nationally televised live on Feb. 25. His plan is to provide an opportunity for Democrats and Republicans to sit together with a representative of the Congressional Budget Office and health-care economists and practitioners to put forward ideas about health-care reform. President Obama is walking the extra mile to garner Republican support for health-care reform legislation. Bipartisanship is what the American people want. “’Come now, and let us reason together’ says the LORD.” (Isaiah 1:18) At this point, it seems as if a bipartisan agreement will require divine intervention.

I confess: President Obama has more hope, faith, and patience with the Republicans than I and many of those on his political left. The good news is that we are not president of the United States of America. President Obama is taking seriously his responsibility to be president of all the people. The question is this: Are Republicans taking their responsibility to the nation seriously?

Republicans complain they have been left out of the process. However, Republicans sit on every committee in the Congress that has considered this. Jeff Zeleny, writing in The New York Times, reports: “Republicans were involved in the health care discussions for months last year in the Senate Finance Committee, but differences with Democrats were never resolved.” They complain that their ideas have not been included in the legislation. Rachel Maddow, on her program that aired on Tuesday, Feb. 9, 2010, pointed out the places in the Senate health-care bill that address at least four of the major Republican demands for health-care: ability to purchase insurance across state lines, ability of small businesses and individuals to pool their buying power, ability for state innovation to lower costs, and tort reform. Even though these Republican ideas are in the Senate bill, it still received not a single Republican vote.

In my personal opinion, Congressional Republicans have not acted in good faith. They have put party and politics before policy and the common good. They have intentionally stalled health-care reforms that will bring health care to millions of Americans who do not have it. Obstructionism on this issue is unconscionable. Hardworking citizens of the United States, the richest nation on earth, die daily because they cannot afford the health care they need.

Some of us who are working and praying for health-care reform legislation are deeply disappointed and frustrated with our elected representatives, both Democrat and Republican. And the president keeps trying for bipartisanship. The definition of insanity is to do the same things over and over again and think there will be a different result. To keep trying for bipartisanship seems insane. However, I know that President Obama is not an insane man. He is no fool. Perhaps he is acting on faith, and very often faith looks foolish.

I suspect that by having this meeting televised, President Obama is putting his faith in us, the American people. He trusts us to watch and asses the facts and the policy proposals according to what is good for the nation and not according to ideological idolatry. It is our responsibility to hold our elected representatives accountable. I plan to watch. I hope that my fellow citizens will as well.

Dr. Valerie Elverton Dixon is an independent scholar who publishes lectures and essays at JustPeaceTheory.com. She received her Ph.D. in religion and society from Temple University and taught Christian ethics at United Theological Seminary and Andover Newton Theological School.

Categories: Health

Guest

Look, universal healthcare is DOA. Medicare for everyone is a bad idea. It's middle class welfare and can't be sustained. It will create rationing/fee schedule system. The fed. gov't has done that already. It's called Tricare. Raise the eligibility age for Medicare. Reduce payouts for Social Security. Raise income eligibility for Medicaid. Get folks who are eligible for gov't aid to actually sign up for it.

SamHamilton

The silence from the group is deafening.

BlueDeacon

Except for their own congressman/woman.

Patricia

Ah, lord voldemort, just as you not having read my previous posts does not equate with me not having posted, so too your warped interpretation of my primary motivation does not equate with my actual motivation.

In a medicare for everyone system, there WOULDN'T BE ANY UNINSURED, and HEALTH CARE WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO EVERYONE. I think by any objective measure, those facts are not irrelevant to my support for medicare for everyone, but are in truth the basis for it!

My primary motivation is HEALTH CARE FOR EVERYONE - how you twist that in your mind to fit your preconceived beliefs is quite irrelevant to me :).

Patricia

Well, isn't one obliged to find out the truth, for sure, BEFORE making their claims :)?

Lord_Voldemort

Okay, so what's your point? Government programs are struggling, but the answer has to be more government?

You note that church-run clinics are dwindling, but did it ever occur to you that they they might be crowded out by government programs?

Again, the mindset that only government counts, that only government can help, is a huge obstacle to creative problem-solving.

LV

Lord_Voldemort

What do I mean by finally coming clean? I mean abandoning the claim that your primary motivation is improving access to health care for the uninsured. I mean your acknowledging that the actual facts of their situation are quite irrelevant to your push for a government-run health care system.

LV

Lord_Voldemort

The points of common ground are as follows:

1. Health care is good.

2. Health care costs more than it probably should

And that's about it. There is a wide divergence on why health care costs are high, which leads to widely divergent plans to address the problem. I'm afraid we're not going to have a consensus on health care reform, because we have two largely irreconcilable views on the subject.

LV

NC77

I think the current healthcare reform legislation being considered may do away with HSAs and FSAs. But I am not certain of that. Just something I heard from one of the talking heads.

NC77

I can agree with you on this 100%. Not sure the exact number but there is an overwhelming number of Americans that want to hit the reset button and purge Congress.

nancyv

Lord Voldemort: Where do you think the money comes from for Medicaid, hospital emergency services and the clinics? Mostly government. The federal and state governments budgets are in deficits. Isn't lowering the deficits paramont to Republicans? Ok, so without government assistance where will the money come from? Years ago many clinics were run by church organizations. But they are a shrinking number.
Without government assistance, you need privated funds. Where will that come from since big corporations want tax cuts or tax credits, and are not charitable organizations. If Health care costs keep escalating, only the privileged rich will be able to afford medical care. After all, doctors claim they will not continue to practice unless they are well compensated.

nancyv

Lord Voldemort: You have got to be kidding! So now our healthcare comes to treating the uninsured in emergency rooms. I was with a friend seeking emergency treatment who was insured but had to wait for 2-1/2 hours for treatment because the hospital emergency room was so backed up with non-insured patients. This was in a prosperous suburb in Illinois. Emergency rooms should be limited to emergencies; not treating the unisured. In addition, those with insurance pay for those un-insured treatments with higher premiums.

nancyv

Tort Reform is loved by big business, big insurance and Republicans because it puts a cap on awards for malpractice. Does anyone think this is one more instance of protecting the "big boys" and taking away one more Constitutional protection to patients of malpractice? How can you put a cap on a mistake that destroys a persons well-being? The man who had the wrong leg amputated, what is fair compensation? The woman who died from a bungled surgery or the patient who was refused life-saving treatment because of insurance costs.... what cap is fair? We have juries to make these decisions in the American Justice system. Or do Republicans believe that American juries are not competant to make the decision. I am tired of this tort reform argument. Surely there are better ways to reform our health care system without taking away this fundamental right.

ford49

The people are the government...we elect representatives!!

Charles Kiker

"Promote the general welfare" is part of the preamble to the Constitution of the United States. I don't know where PRK comes up with the idea that it refers to the government and not of the people.

ford49

Unfortunately given the current state of affairs, I think gradual change is
like believing cockroaches are solitary creatures. This has simmered on the
back burner since Truman was President; its not a new idea. It needs new
thinking and commitment and if people of God can't or won't see the need for
all people to have affordable healthcare then hearts are obviously
hardening.

Wellescent Health

No point of disagreement there. Unfortunately, the bills that represent the proposed reforms aren't as simple as that question. I wish they were...

SamHamilton

I agree that very few people really want to make any sacrifices to reform the system. Most every one wants to protect what they have. Which is why I think making smaller changes over a long period of time is a better idea and will have more success than one comprehensive reform effort in which everyone's ox gets gored.

ford49

The reimbursement issue while real is ultimately a red herring. The problem
with prk and the others on both sides of the aisle that are whining about
the current "bad legislation" is illustrated by the old line, "Everyone
wants to go to Heaven but *no one* wants to leave *right now*."

Everyone knows the current system is broken but they want what they want,
not what may be good for everyone. They all can identify "problems" but
narcississtically don't like any of the solutions offered or are not
offering any solutions of substance.

Add to that the political detritus being thrown about with abandon and we
are now facing the reality, "to not decide is to decide". As the cartoon
character Pogo tells us, "We have seen the enemy and it is us."

We all, conservative and liberal, will regret our collective stupidity if we
don't accept our collective responsibilty.

Patricia

I think I need to clarify that I understand completely that medicare for everyone is not included in the current health care legislation. I bring it up now because if President Obama is serious about listening to ideas to fix the health care system, the voices of those advocating medicare for everyone ought to finally be part of the conversation, not frozen out completely like we have been from the beginning of the process.

I am hoping that the summit is going to go beyond a tired re-hash of the current bill and failed Republican ideas, and truly consider other, real, workable solutions.

Senator Bernie Sanders and other Congressional supporters of medicare for everyone ought to be at the table.

Their ideas ought to be given a fair, objective, hearing.

Their ideas ought to be considered on their own merit, without partisan preconceptions.

And our media ought to be encouraged to provide truthful, objective coverage.

Why, for instance, did it take a "Daily Show" episode this week to reveal the fact that the State of Hawaii has universal coverage for its citizens, that they've had this system in place for 40 YEARS, that Hawaiians are very happy with their model, and that it appears to be working very well? Why was their model not mentioned even once in the health care reform discussion? Why was Massachusetts' much more recent, sometimes troubled model the only one we heard about?

Even the Republican National Committee, who had their national meeting in Hawaii this week, did not seem to realize that they were railing against "government-run health care" from a State that HAS, and is HAPPY with, "government-run health care"?

I am advocating medicare for everyone here (and with my elected representatives) because I believe the upcoming health care summit offers a real opportunity to change course and adopt a system that will actually solve our health care access problems and fix our broken health care system instead of cumbersome legislation which serves mainly to further enrich and benefit corporate-health special interests.

We need medicare for everyone.