The Lie Factory: How Medical Care for All Was Defeated in the US of A

Old Bookaroo

Silver Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
4,567
Reaction score
3,944
Golden Thread
0
The Lie Factory;How politics became a business.
by Jill Lepore

In the fall of 1944, [Earl] Warren got a serious kidney infection. This set him thinking about the rising costs of medical care, and the catastrophic effects that sudden illness could have on a family less well provided for than his own. “I came to the conclusion that the only way to remedy this situation was to spread the cost through insurance,” he wrote in his memoirs.

He asked his staff to develop a proposal. “We concluded that health insurance should be collected through the Social Security System. After some studies, it was determined that the employers and employees in that system should each contribute one and one half per cent of wages paid by or to them.” After conferring with the California Medical Association, he anticipated no objections from doctors. And so, in January of 1945, during his State of the State address, he announced his proposal for comprehensive, compulsory health insurance for the state of California.

Earl Warren began his political career as a conservative and ended it as one of the most hated liberals in American history. What happened to him? One answer is: Whitaker and Baxter.

Retained by the California Medical Association for an annual fee of twenty-five thousand dollars to campaign against the Governor’s plan, Whitaker and Baxter took a piece of legislation that most people liked and taught them to hate it. “You can’t beat something with nothing,” they liked to say.

They launched a drive for Californians to buy their own insurance, privately. Voluntary Health Insurance Week, driven by forty thousand inches of advertising in more than four hundred newspapers, was observed in fifty-three of the state’s fifty-eight counties. Whitaker and Baxter sent more than nine thousand doctors out with prepared speeches. They coined a slogan: “Political medicine is bad medicine.”
...

They invented an enemy. They sent out twenty-seven thousand copies of a pamphlet called “The Health Question,” which featured a picture of a man, a woman, and a child in the woods—“a forest of fear”—menaced by skeletons who have in their mouths, instead of teeth, the word “BILL.” Whitaker and Baxter sent out two and a half million copies of another pamphlet, called “Politically-Controlled Medicine.” They printed postcards, for voters to stick in the mail:

Dear Senator:
Please vote against all Compulsory Health Insurance Bills pending before the Legislature. We have enough regimentation in this country now. Certainly we don’t want to be forced to go to “A State doctor,” or to pay for such a doctor whether we use him or not. That system was born in Germany—and is part and parcel of what our boys are fighting overseas. Let’s not adopt it here.

In 1945, Warren’s bill failed to pass by just one vote. As Warren’s biographer G. Edward White remarked, “The scuttling of his health insurance plan was a confirmation for Warren of the nature of the political process, in which advocates of programs based on humanity and common sense were pitted against selfish, vindictive special interests.”

Warren reintroduced the bill. And again Whitaker and Baxter defeated it. “They stormed the Legislature with their invective,” Warren later wrote, “and my bill was not even accorded a decent burial.” It was the greatest legislative victory at the hands of admen the country had ever seen. It was not, of course, the last.

In 1945, months after Earl Warren proposed compulsory health insurance in California, Harry Truman proposed a national program. “The health of American children, like their education, should be recognized as a definite public responsibility,” the President said. When Republicans took control of Congress in 1946, Truman’s proposed federal health-insurance program, which, like Warren’s, was funded by a payroll tax, stalled. In his State of the Union address in 1948, an election year, Truman urged passage of his plan, which enjoyed widespread popular support. In November, Truman won the election. Days afterward, the American Medical Association called up the San Francisco offices of Campaigns, Inc. The A.M.A. retained Whitaker and Baxter at a fee of a hundred thousand dollars a year, and with an annual budget of more than a million dollars, to thwart Truman’s plan. The A.M.A. raised the money by assessing twenty-five dollars a year from every one of its members.

At the beginning of 1949, Whitaker and Baxter, the directors of the A.M.A.’s National Education Campaign, entered national politics, setting up headquarters in Chicago, with a staff of thirty-seven. “This must be a campaign to arouse and alert the American people in every walk of life, until it generates a great public crusade and a fundamental fight for freedom,” their Plan of Campaign began. “Any other plan of action, in view of the drift toward socialization and despotism all over the world, would invite disaster.” But when Whitaker told the Washington press corps, at a luncheon, that the F.B.I. was terrorizing the A.M.A., the Washington Post offered that maybe the A.M.A., at the hands of Whitaker and Baxter, ought to stop “whipping itself into a neurosis and attempting to terrorize the whole American public every time the Administration proposes a Welfare Department or a health program.”
...
Meanwhile, inside Campaigns, Inc., a much more detailed Plan of Campaign circulated, in typescript, marked “CONFIDENTIAL:— NOT FOR PUBLICATION.” (It can be found with the firm’s papers, which are housed at the California State Archives, in Sacramento.) It reads, in part:

1. The immediate objective is the defeat of the compulsory health insurance program pending in Congress. 2. The long-term objective is to put a permanent stop to the agitation for socialized medicine in this country by (a) awakening the people to the danger of a politically-controlled, government-regulated health system; (b) convincing the people, through a Nation wide campaign of education, of the superior advantages of private medicine, as practiced in America, over the State-dominated medical systems of other countries; (c) stimulating the growth of voluntary health insurance systems to take the economic shock out of illness and increase the availability of medical care to the American people.

As Whitaker and Baxter put it, in an earlier version of the plan, “Basically, the issue is whether we are to remain a free Nation, in which the individual can work out his own destiny, or whether we are to take one of the final steps toward becoming a Socialist or Communist State. We have to paint the picture, in vivid verbiage that no one can misunderstand, of Germany, Russia—and finally, England.” They settled on a slogan: “KEEP POLITICS OUT OF MEDICINE.” And they settled on a smear, one that they had used against Warren’s plan: they called Truman’s plan “socialized medicine.”

In an attempt to educate every doctor, nurse, and druggist in the United States about the dangers of socialized medicine, they went on the road. Whitaker, speaking to two hundred doctors at a meeting of the Council of the New England Medical Societies, said:

Hitler and Stalin and the socialist government of Great Britain all have used the opiate of socialized medicine to deaden the pain of lost liberty and lull the people into non-resistance. Old World contagion of compulsory health insurance, if allowed to spread to our New World, will mark the beginning of the end of free institutions in America. It will only be a question of time until the railroads, the steel mills, the power industry, the banks and the farming industry are nationalized.
...

Whitaker and Baxter liked to talk about their work as “grass roots” campaigning. The fight against socialized medicine was a case in point: “The A.M.A. in its campaign is carrying its case to the people of America in a grass roots crusade which we hope, with your help, and the help of tens of thousands of others, will reach every corner of this country.” Not everyone was convinced that a lavishly paid advertising agency distributing 7.5 million copies of a pamphlet called “The Voluntary Way Is the American Way” to doctors’ offices constituted a “grass roots” movement.

“Dear Sirs,” one doctor wrote them. “Is it 2 ½ or 3 ½ million dollars you have allotted for your ‘grass roots lobby’?”

Whitaker and Baxter’s campaign against Harry Truman’s national-health-insurance proposal cost the A.M.A. nearly five million dollars, and it took more than three years. But they turned the President’s sensible, popular, and urgently needed legislative reform into a bogeyman so scary that, even today, millions of Americans are still scared.

Truman was furious. As to what in his plan could possibly be construed as “socialized medicine,” he told the press in 1952, he didn’t know what in the Sam Hill that could be. He had one more thing to say: there was “nothing in this bill that came any closer to socialism than the payments the American Medical Association makes to the advertising firm of Whitaker and Baxter to misrepresent my health program.”

The Invention of Political Consulting : The New Yorker

Good luck to all,

~The Old Bookaroo
 

Last edited:
From your article Book;
"1. The immediate objective is the defeat of the compulsory health insurance program pending in Congress. 2. The long-term objective is to put a permanent stop to the agitation for socialized medicine in this country by (a) awakening the people to the danger of a politically-controlled, government-regulated health system; (b) convincing the people, through a Nation wide campaign of education, of the superior advantages of private medicine, as practiced in America, over the State-dominated medical systems of other countries; (c) stimulating the growth of voluntary health insurance systems to take the economic shock out of illness and increase the availability of medical care to the American people.

As Whitaker and Baxter put it, in an earlier version of the plan, “Basically, the issue is whether we are to remain a free Nation, in which the individual can work out his own destiny, or whether we are to take one of the final steps toward becoming a Socialist or Communist State. We have to paint the picture, in vivid verbiage that no one can misunderstand, of Germany, Russia—and finally, England.” They settled on a slogan: “KEEP POLITICS OUT OF MEDICINE.” And they settled on a smear, one that they had used against Warren’s plan: they called Truman’s plan “socialized medicine.”

The objectives are very reasonable, they shouldn't have put them in the article as it weakens the disinformational value.
I know the article was written by a die hard progressive, but their are so many intellectual flaws it would be hard to counter them all, But you and the author are hoping for that, because he makes a nice condensed version of the problem.



Let's start right here. Taxes. An extremely high tax rate left in effect until the 60s caused companies to scurry about looking for a way to reward their employees. Health insurance was offered as part of the pay packages as an incentive to hire the best employees ( Presumably the officers). Over time it was such a good incentive it started being offered to lower and lower employee echelons. The free market was winning, especially after the tax rates started coming down. The problem looks to be that people forgot that healthcare isn't tied to employment,, you could buy it on your own! The companies only did it as a bonus to your salary. ( I don't have time to research all of this, it is from memory, but I have given the synopsis and if you care enough for the truth you can start here)

So the tax rates were at an extremely high rate during the time period and the progressives wanted to raise the taxes Higher,, That sounds like the socialist idea was doomed from the start.

Here is a graph of tax rates through that time period, from Wiki;

220px-Historical_Mariginal_Tax_Rate_for_Highest_and_Lowest_Income_Earners.jpg
 

Just one question OB, why do you think I need the Government to tell me I need insurance? If all this is for 31 million people who had no insurance. What have they been doing for the last 50 years?
 

Actually, what did they do for the last few million years? Some stuff gets cured, but we are mortal beings, insurance or no.
 

onfire:

Doing without. High medical expenses are one of the primary causes for personal bankruptcy in the US. Many of the people who went broke had what they thought was health insurance. Turned out they were often junk policies.

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo
 

smokeythecat:

Depending on how far back you want to go, they died in their early twenties or thirties. The less than half that didn't die in childbirth (along with their mothers) or in the first year or so of life, of course.

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo
 

onfire:

Doing without. High medical expenses are one of the primary causes for personal bankruptcy in the US. Many of the people who went broke had what they thought was health insurance. Turned out they were often junk policies.

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo

Wait till they try to use BOcare in the wrong place.
 

Buckaroo - good point, the average likespan of a person in 1900 was 48 years of age. My great great great (add some more greats) aunt died in 1807. She was born in 1699. So it just depends.

There are more places in the world without good or any healthcare today than places that have it. We are blessed to be able to live in this country where we at least have the opportunity to get some.

The insurance industry is probably going to be the next industry in line for bailouts (after student loans). I'm afraid we're going to have really cool health care cards and no where to use them.
 

We are blessed to be able to live in this country where we at least have the opportunity to get some.

The insurance industry is probably going to be the next industry in line for bailouts (after student loans). I'm afraid we're going to have really cool health care cards and no where to use them.

Liked the above portion of your post SmokeyTC. Especially the last sentence. So very, very true ... but only if the cards really are good looking.

Then again, they may skimp and let a middle school art class design them.
 

smokeythecat:

Why do you think the health insurance industry is going to need a bailout? Not to say the previous Federal government ones didn't work (many did).

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo
 

Dave44:

Affordable health care (actually, of course, it's generally sick care) insurance has been tied to employment. Anyone pricing individual plans knows the huge differences in cost between group and individual plans.

I'd debate how "free" the highly state-regulated health insurance system is. In many parts of the country there is only one provider; in others, only a couple.

The fact that you fell for the propaganda (willingly, of course) shows how effective it was. And still is.

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo
 

I think it's a possibility in the not too distant future. It just depends on how the abomination care works out. Or doesn't work out. It has some good points to it and some not too good points to it also. Right, wrong or indifferent the money has to come from somewhere for all the expanded services (if they materialize) and it is possible besides us, the insurance carriers might get the dirty end of the stick. I was looking at long term care insurance recently, and while I have decided not to purchase any, a lot of the carriers got out of the market because they were losing money. So far the insurance carriers seem to be doing ok, but things are in a state of flux and who knows?
 

Dave44:

Affordable health care (actually, of course, it's generally sick care) insurance has been tied to employment. Anyone pricing individual plans knows the huge differences in cost between group and individual plans.

I'd debate how "free" the highly state-regulated health insurance system is. In many parts of the country there is only one provider; in others, only a couple.

The fact that you fell for the propaganda (willingly, of course) shows how effective it was. And still is.

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo

Again Booky;"Affordable health care (actually, of course, it's generally sick care) insurance has been tied to employment. Anyone pricing individual plans knows the huge differences in cost between group and individual plans."

Anyone who has tried to do both sides of the aisle as a small company does indeed know the cost difference,, It is obvious you have never done either one! Willfully entrapped by propaganda is your M.O.! But you spread disinformation at such an alarming rate too! LOLOL

You need more info! I have checked from both sides of this issue. And my employees were charged less for insurance buying it for themselves than I could get it for,, Matter of fact, they could get it for less than half what it would cost me. You need to go talk to the willfully ignorant,, we know better.
 

smokeythecat:

I think long term care is a different business than health insurance.

Health and life insurance companies are regulated by each state. The primary purpose of the state regulator is to make sure the companies remain solvent by making a profit each year. In other words, they want to be sure the companies are charging enough.

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo
 

Speaking of tax treatment through the years, Wanna see what wiki came up with here? Interesting, I thought. 1932-We are in a depression,, better tax our way out!

Wiki;
[TABLE="class: wikitable collapsible, align: center"]
[TR]
[TH="colspan: 8"]History of income tax rates adjusted for inflation (1913-2010)[SUP][61][/SUP][SUP][62][/SUP][/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH][/TH]
[TH]Number of[/TH]
[TH]First Bracket[/TH]
[TH="colspan: 3"]Top Bracket[/TH]
[TH][/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]Year[/TH]
[TH]Brackets[/TH]
[TH]Rate[/TH]
[TH]Rate[/TH]
[TH]Income[/TH]
[TH]Adj. 2011[/TH]
[TH]Comment[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1913[/TH]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD]1%[/TD]
[TD]7%[/TD]
[TD]$500,000[/TD]
[TD]$11.3M[/TD]
[TD]First permanent income tax[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1917[/TH]
[TD]21[/TD]
[TD]2%[/TD]
[TD]67%[/TD]
[TD]$2,000,000[/TD]
[TD]$35M[/TD]
[TD]World War I financing[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1925[/TH]
[TD]23[/TD]
[TD]1.5%[/TD]
[TD]25%[/TD]
[TD]$100,000[/TD]
[TD]$1.28M[/TD]
[TD]Post war reductions[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1932[/TH]
[TD]55[/TD]
[TD]4%[/TD]
[TD]63%[/TD]
[TD]$1,000,000[/TD]
[TD]$16.4M[/TD]
[TD]Depression era[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1936[/TH]
[TD]31[/TD]
[TD]4%[/TD]
[TD]79%[/TD]
[TD]$5,000,000[/TD]
[TD]$80.7M[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1941[/TH]
[TD]32[/TD]
[TD]10%[/TD]
[TD]81%[/TD]
[TD]$5,000,000[/TD]
[TD]$76.3M[/TD]
[TD]World War II[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1942[/TH]
[TD]24[/TD]
[TD]19%[/TD]
[TD]88%[/TD]
[TD]$200,000[/TD]
[TD]$2.75M[/TD]
[TD]Revenue Act of 1942[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1944[/TH]
[TD]24[/TD]
[TD]23%[/TD]
[TD]94%[/TD]
[TD]$200,000[/TD]
[TD]$2.54M[/TD]
[TD]Individual Income Tax Act of 1944[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1946[/TH]
[TD]24[/TD]
[TD]20%[/TD]
[TD]91%[/TD]
[TD]$200,000[/TD]
[TD]$2.30M[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1964[/TH]
[TD]26[/TD]
[TD]16%[/TD]
[TD]77%[/TD]
[TD]$400,000[/TD]
[TD]$2.85M[/TD]
[TD]Tax reduction during Vietnam war[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1965[/TH]
[TD]25[/TD]
[TD]14%[/TD]
[TD]70%[/TD]
[TD]$200,000[/TD]
[TD]$1.42M[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1981[/TH]
[TD]16[/TD]
[TD]14%[/TD]
[TD]70%[/TD]
[TD]$212,000[/TD]
[TD]$532k[/TD]
[TD]Reagan era tax cuts[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1982[/TH]
[TD]14[/TD]
[TD]12%[/TD]
[TD]50%[/TD]
[TD]$106,000[/TD]
[TD]$199k[/TD]
[TD]Reagan era tax cuts[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1987[/TH]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]11%[/TD]
[TD]38.5%[/TD]
[TD]$90,000[/TD]
[TD]$178k[/TD]
[TD]Reagan era tax cuts[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1988[/TH]
[TD]2[/TD]
[TD]15%[/TD]
[TD]28%[/TD]
[TD]$29,750[/TD]
[TD]$56k[/TD]
[TD]Reagan era tax cuts[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1991[/TH]
[TD]3[/TD]
[TD]15%[/TD]
[TD]31%[/TD]
[TD]$82,150[/TD]
[TD]$135k[/TD]
[TD]Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]1993[/TH]
[TD]5[/TD]
[TD]15%[/TD]
[TD]39.6%[/TD]
[TD]$250,000[/TD]
[TD]$388k[/TD]
[TD]Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2003[/TH]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]10%[/TD]
[TD]35%[/TD]
[TD]$311,950[/TD]
[TD]$380k[/TD]
[TD]Bush tax cuts[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2011[/TH]
[TD]6[/TD]
[TD]10%[/TD]
[TD]35%[/TD]
[TD]$379,150[/TD]
[TD]$379k[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TH]2013[/TH]
[TD]7[/TD]
[TD]10%[/TD]
[TD]39.6%[/TD]
[TD]$400,000[/TD]
[TD]$388k[SUP][63][/SUP][/TD]
[TD]American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
 

Dave44:

What happened to 1986?

Good luck to all,

~ The Old Bookaroo

PS: What do you care more about - the maximum possible tax rate, or what people actually pay each year?
 

Ask wiki, book. Simple cut and paste. I know you know how.

I wonder what happened between 46 and 64, myself.
 

I don't understand the mindset of someone wanting to be "taken care of" at someone else's expense.
 

Buckaroo - good point, the average likespan of a person in 1900 was 48 years of age. My great great great (add some more greats) aunt died in 1807. She was born in 1699. So it just depends.

There are more places in the world without good or any healthcare today than places that have it. We are blessed to be able to live in this country where we at least have the opportunity to get some.

The insurance industry is probably going to be the next industry in line for bailouts (after student loans). I'm afraid we're going to have really cool health care cards and no where to use them.

Insurance and the guvment are the main cause of the high prices of medical care. Insurance because the healthcare industry knows they will pay, and guvmnet because the force the control.

Free medical schools for any foreigner runs the cost of everything up, also. Maybe we should help our own thru medical school and neither had any slack cut for them!!!!!!!!!!!
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Discussions

Back
Top