Skip to content Skip to footer
|

Minor Reform of Health Care Hailed as Major Triumph

The Supreme Court’s health care ruling is merely the latest turn in the sad spectacle of American health care reform.

The Supreme Court’s health care ruling is merely the latest turn in the sad spectacle of American health care reform. In its 5-4 decision, the court on Thursday declared that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is constitutional. Upon its announcement, liberal celebratory outcry ensued and a storm of media commentary was unleashed. This ruling will remain the focus point of blogs, newspapers and all major news outlets for weeks to come.

The irony – and the spectacle – lies in the utter insignificance of the reform. Designed to decrease health care costs and to insure the 50 million uninsured Americans, the ACA does neither; even after the law’s full implementation, tens of millions will remain uninsured and costs will continue to rise. Nor does insurance guarantee economic security: high co-pays and deductibles will continue to burden even those now covered.(1)

Regardless of such failings, liberal writers and columnists on Thursday unanimously declared the ruling “momentous” and a “historic win.” Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Eugene Robinson claimed that Obama “enshrined” the belief that “health care should be available to all who need it regardless of their ability to pay – that it is not a privilege but a right.” Such statements disgrace the roughly twenty-five million Americans whom this legislation has neglected to insure. And they fail to acknowledge the still-rising costs of health care for all Americans.

Democratic hyperbole has turned a mild reform into a monumental achievement for all Americans. Back when the Congressional battle for ACA’s passage was waging, Democrats and commentators quickly dropped all aspirations for a (truly progressive) single-payer option, deciding instead to throw all their propagandistic might behind something more politically unchallenging. As “single payer” lost whatever currency it initially had, the entire political discourse shifted rightward. According to this modified discourse, a small expansion in insurance coverage is declared “historic.” This shift in discourse has also enabled Republicans to convince millions of citizens that the ACA constitutes a government takeover of health care, that it is a radical, unconstitutional impingement on personal liberty. On either side (and there are only two), health care debate has thus become a bloated and spectacular exaggeration of what is, in policy terms, a question of minor reform. Yet, much of the country has taken the bait. If the language we use determines how we think, then it’s easy to see how the sensationalist political and mediatic portrayal of this debate has rendered us incapable of noticing its insignificance.

Obviously, health care reform was needed. And, yet, the ACA only increases the profits of the very private insurance industry responsible for skyrocketing costs and the neglected care of the poor and the sick. Here’s how the legislation works: to lower average health care costs (for all), it imposes a mandate that requires every US citizen to buy insurance. Consequently, the healthy and previously uninsured will now enter large private insurance pools, thus bringing down overall costs for others in the pools. With the added revenues from these newly insured, the law requires companies to provide insurance for the sick, those whom they’ve previously rejected. And, yet, the insurance industry’s support for the legislation is telling: by increasing the numbers of the insured (paying customers), these companies only stand to benefit.

According to a statement issued on Thursday by Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP), “the ACA perpetuates a dominant role for the private insurance industry. Each year, that industry siphons off hundreds of billions of health care dollars for overhead, profit and the paperwork it demands from doctors and hospitals; it denies care in order to increase insurers’ bottom line; and it obstructs any serious effort to control costs.” This legislation further empowers the very interests at the heart of the diseased American health care system. There is nothing “momentous” about it.

The spectacle of health care reform is testament to the poverty of our political discourse. Unable to distinguish between real and illusory reform, we dumbly paste hyperbole unto the most mild of legislation and pour our energies into the most insignificant of policy battles. The ACA deserves not even a fraction of the attention we have given it.

1. Physicians for a National Health Plan (PNHP).

We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.

As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.

Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.

As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.

At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.

Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.

You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.