Yesterday marked the fourth anniversary of Obamacare, but it marked
the seventh anniversary of opposition to the concept underlying health
care reform.
At least two years before the first
words of legislation were written, and three years before the Affordable
Care Act was signed into law, the entrenched health care interests were
hard at work creating their strategies to ensure as much as possible
that whatever passed would not have an adverse effect on profits.
The overall plan included a broad range of initiatives to plant fear,
uncertainty and doubt about reform ideas in the minds of elected
officials and ordinary Americans. For instance, the special interests
collaborated under the auspices of organizations like the Healthcare
Leadership Council, a coalition that encompasses executives from
insurance companies, drug and medical device makers, biotech firms and
hospitals. I know because I participated in many meetings of the HLC
during my years as an insurance industry executive.
The campaign of fear, uncertainty and doubt — or FUD, to use its
acronym — continues to this day against the law, and it will be waged in
coming months by cynical politicians who believe it will be the surest
way to win votes in November. I’m already seeing the outlines of the
latest iteration of the campaign taking shape.
But let’s first go back to the spring of 2007. Both health insurance
premiums and the number of uninsured Americans were continuing to
skyrocket. Polls were showing that voters were fed up with our
money-driven health care system, and that was emboldening the Democratic
presidential candidates to include reform proposals in their policy
platforms.
At an industry briefing I attended in May of 2007, Bill McInturff of
Public Opinion Strategies, which has been conducting opinion and message
research for health insurers since the early 1990s, made crystal clear
the point that Americans were losing confidence in the private health
insurance market.
As I described in my book, Deadly Spin,
McInturff’s first slide showed that there had been a significant recent
shift in opinion and that a majority of people were now telling his
pollsters that the government should do more to solve the many problems
plaguing America’s health care system.
Those of us in the room who were members of the industry’s Strategic
Communications Committee could see we had our work cut out for us. We
knew we would have to scare people away from the notion that more
government involvement would be beneficial.
Also at that meeting were representatives of the industry’s big trade
group, America’s Health Insurance Plans, and one of its PR firms, APCO
Worldwide. The AHIP and APCO staffers briefed us on the tactics they
were recommending, which included using a front group, initially funded
by the pharmaceutical industry and called Health Care America, to begin
the scare campaign. Such a campaign wouldn’t be effective if the public
knew that drug makers and insurance companies were actually conducting
it, so steps would need to be taken to make the media and public believe
that Health Care America was really a grassroots organization.
One of the first targets of Health Care America was Michael Moore,
whose movie SiCKO was about to have its U.S. premier. The objective of
Health Care America’s attacks on Moore and SiCKO was to frighten people
into believing that quality of care would suffer if we allowed the
government to “take over” the health system.
Immediately after the first American screening of SiCKO in Sacramento, many reporters got this in their inbox:
“Health Care America, a non-partisan, non-profit health care advocacy
organization, released the following statement in response to a
California rally held by Michael Moore and a variety of advocates in
support of a government takeover of our health care system: The reality
is that government-run health systems around the world are failing
patients — forcing them to forgo treatments or seek out-of-pocket care
in other countries.”
Fast forward to the spring of 2009. Before Democratic congressional
leaders had written any reform legislation, political consultant Frank
Luntz suggested in a memo to Republican leaders that they should
characterize anything the Democrats proposed as a “government takeover.”
“Nothing else turns people against the government takeover of
healthcare more than the realistic expectation that it will result in
delayed and potentially even denied treatment, procedures and/or
medications,” Luntz wrote.
The industry’s years-long FUD campaign clearly has scared millions of
Americans into believing — erroneously — that Obamacare represents a
government takeover.
This past week, we got a glimpse into how the insurance industry and
its political allies will give the “government takeover” campaign a new
spin: Obamacare will cause insurance premiums to double in 2015.
Citing “one senior insurance executive who requested anonymity,” The Hill, an inside-the-Beltway publication, predicted last week that “Obamacare-related premiums will double in some parts of the country.”
There is absolutely no reason to believe this will happen — and good
reasons why it won’t, which I’ll explain next week — but facts have
little place in most political campaigns. Rest assured, the specter of
skyrocketing premiums will be part of a carefully crafted and executed
campaign designed to create fear, uncertainty and doubt in the minds of
voters next November. Some things never change.
Former CIGNA executive-turned-whistleblower Wendell Potter is
writing about the health care industry and the ongoing battle for health
reform for the Center for Public Integrity.
source
No comments:
Post a Comment