Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The Secret Right-Wing Strategy on Health Care—Exposed!

Posted by Bernie Horn at 10:13 AM on May 7, 2009.


If conservatives make the debate about what is good and bad in the Obama plan - they will win.
secrets

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Health and Wellness in your
mailbox!

 

Conservative pollster Frank Luntz recently provided right wingers on Capitol Hill a secret 28-page memo entitled The Language of Healthcare 2009—which has leaked! The memo was intended to offer a message framing strategy to defeat President Obama’s plan to provide health care for all. But the document is more useful to progressives than conservatives.

Dr. Frank Luntz is a right-wing spinmeister who won broad influence by acting as pollster for Newt Gingrich, helping to frame the 1994 Republican Contract with America. Over the last dozen years, corporations and conservative ideologues have paid Luntz tens of millions of dollars to craft their messages, and his research has included “hundreds of thousands of telephone interviews, hundreds of dial sessions and focus groups, and literally a million research hours.” In short, he knows what he’s talking about.

Luntz briefed House Republicans about his findings at a closed-door session yesterday (where he was very angry that his memo had been leaked). The memo is based on polling and dial sessions conducted within the last few weeks. If you want all the gory details, you can read the entire memo here. The substance can be grouped into three overall lessons for progressives.

 

First, progressive pollsters have been entirely right about health care. Conservatives who oppose reform have very little public support.

Progressives have conducted a great deal of survey research on health care over the past two years, much of it by top pollster Celinda Lake working with the Herndon Alliance, FamiliesUSA, AFL-CIO, and Health Care for America Now.

Lake has made it clear that Americans strongly support progressive legislation to guarantee quality, affordable health care for all, as long as they can choose their doctor, their healthcare package, and their insurance provider.

Luntz agrees:

Fully 70% of Americans consider our healthcare system to be either in a state of crisis or seriously troubled and requires significant reform.

He says to conservatives:

You simply MUST be vocally and passionately on the side of reform. The status quo is no longer acceptable. If the dynamic becomes “President Obama is on the side of reform and Republicans are against it,” then the battle is lost…

The biggest issue is the soaring cost of health care:

Make no mistake: the high cost of healthcare is still public enemy number one on this issue—and why so many Americans (including Republicans and conservatives) think the Democrats can handle healthcare better than the GOP.

Health insurance companies are very unpopular—so much so that Luntz says to conservatives:

We suggest ratcheting up the rhetoric against insurance companies to almost the same degree as you do against Washington bureaucracy. Call the Democratic plan a “bailout for the insurance industry [because] the two things the American people hate most [are]: Washington bureaucracy and insurer greed.

While conservatives should criticize “Washington,” they can’t attack Obama—he’s too popular:

Every time we test language that criticized the President by name, the response was negative—even among Republicans…. If you make this debate about Republicans vs. Obama, you lose.

At the same time, Republicans start with a big disadvantage:

[The] campaign against government healthcare has left the GOP at least 20 points behind on the issue—perhaps more.

So this is our chance. If we progressives play our cards right, we will finally provide America with the kind of sweeping health care reform it needs.

Second, the best conservative strategy is to frame progressive legislation as a “government takeover” of health care, resulting in bureaucracy, delay, and loss of patient choice. Progressives must block this argument and counterattack.

Luntz tells conservatives that the best and probably only way to defeat the Obama plan is to tell people they personally will experience lower-quality care, and that government bureaucrats will make choices for them.

This is what he recommends as “the best anti-Democrat message”:

No Washington bureaucrat or healthcare lobbyist should stand between your family and your doctor. The Democrats want to put Washington politicians in charge of YOUR healthcare. We can and must do better. Say no to a Washington takeover of healthcare and say yes to personalized patient-centered care.

Here are some other examples of the language he suggests:

The plan put forward by the Democrats will deny people treatments they need and make them wait to get the treatments they are allowed to receive.

And:

In countries with government run healthcare, politicians make your healthcare decisions. They decide if you’ll get the procedure you need, or if you are disqualified because the treatment is too expensive or because you are too old.

If Luntz’s despicable lies sound like scare tactics, they are. In fact, his polling asks people what “frightens” and “scares” them the most about potential health care changes. He flatly told GOP congressmen that:

The idea that a doctor or a hospital would deny care that they need is what frightens them the most about a Washington takeover.

None of this is new to progressives who have been reading Celinda Lake’s survey research results over the years. In fact, the leading progressive health care plans have been structured to rebut these very attacks. Americans—not the government—would choose their insurance plan and their doctors. Everyone would have the freedom to keep their current insurance if they want to. The right wing will make wild claims, but those claims will be demonstrably false.

So we have a good defense. But we have an even stronger response. As Luntz concedes, what Americans don’t like about insurance companies is that they are bureaucratic, deny coverage, and put profit ahead of patients’ health.

Our leading progressive reform proposals address those concerns, prohibiting private health insurers from turning people away, delaying or denying coverage, or raising rates based on a person’s health history. Progressive proposals guarantee grievance and appeal procedures in all types of health insurance, and protect all federal and state patients’ rights. So we should not only defend our program from conservative misrepresentations, we should counterattack that our progressive health care proposals protect Americans from insurance company bureaucrats who currently make arbitrary decisions and improperly interfere with the doctor-patient relationship.

Third, conservatives can’t succeed without offering their own plan for health care reform. Progressives must hound conservatives to lay out that plan—because it will be horrific.

Luntz says over and over that:

It’s not enough to just say what you’re against. You have to tell them what you’re for. Overt attacks on the Democratic proposals will fail if they aren’t balanced with your solutions.

And:

If [conservatives] offer no vision for what’s better for America, you’ll be relegated to insignificance at best and labeled obstructionist at worst.

But Luntz doesn’t know what right wingers should say they’re for. He doesn’t have a vision for their legislation. All he can do is recommend vague language about a conservative plan:

We need targeted reform with measurable results that improves patient care.

And he suggests they talk about:

A balanced, common sense approach that provides assistance to those who truly need it and keeps healthcare patient-centered rather than government-centered for everyone.

And:

What Americans are looking for [is] “more access to more treatments and more doctors…with less interference from insurance companies and Washington politicians and special interests.”

Here, Luntz is being unrealistic. Conservatives on Capitol Hill are ideological extremists who simply won’t put forth a real reform package. When they finally offer a health care plan, it is likely to coddle the insurance companies, do nothing about soaring costs, favor the rich, and be based on preposterous “free market” assumptions. It will fall flat with the American people.

If conservatives succeed in making the debate all about what is good and bad in the Obama plan—if they can get away with just criticizing details—then they probably can have a substantial negative impact. But if they’re hounded into creating and disclosing a substitute health care plan—and the debate is about which is the better plan, Obama’s or the conservatives’—then the right wingers will be marginalized and rendered ineffective by the out-of-the-mainstream proposal that they will inevitably offer. So get ready to hound them!

Incredibly, all this advice from Luntz comes just days after he told a reporter that he’s become a pollster for Hollywood studios because he’s had enough of politics. “I’m tired of selling reality,” he said. “Reality sucks. It’s mean. Divisive. Negative…I don’t like what politics has become.”

I guess hypocrisy goes hand-in-hand with lying.

If you want to stand up and fight against the right-wing lies and for quality, affordable health care for all, visit our friends at Health Care for America Now. They’ll tell you what you can do.

Digg!

Tagged as: gop, lies, health care

Bernie Horn is a Senior Fellow at Campaign for America’s Future and author of the recent book, "Framing the Future: How Progressive Values Can Win Elections and Influence People."


Lieberman Pledges To Filibuster Healthcare Bill, Says Public Option Is "Unnecessary"
Lieberman calls it a "matter of conscience."
Post by Amanda Terkel. November 9, 2009.
House of Representatives Passes Health-Care Reform Bill in Historic Vote
With the vote of a single Republican, Democrats passed the Affordable Health Care Act for America.
Post by Adele Stan. November 7, 2009.
House Takes Up-or-Down Vote on Stupak Amendment, Threatening Women's Rights
The House leadership bows to anti-choice congressmen, allowing them a vote on an anti-choice amendment to the health-care bill.
Post by RH Reality Check. November 7, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
PB
Posted by: Bigioni on May 7, 2009 11:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a critical moment for the credibility of the Dems. If they fail to deliver serious health care reform, it will not mean that Americans don't want it. It will mean that the Dems are complicit in perpetuating the most dysfunctional health care system in the developed world. Over the course of Obama's political career, he has already backed off of supporting a single-payer system. Grassroots Democrats must step up now on health care. They must not wait to be led by the Administration. They must show that there is no choice left but to put forward a serious proposal. They must ensure that the American people are not lied to again on this issue.

One more thing: the Republican talking points seem to be directed at upper middle class voters who actually have health care and are primarily worried about quality of care and choice. The talking points don't even make sense to someone (i.e. the millions of someones) who have no health care at all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: PB Posted by: mrbailey47
The Energy!
Posted by: pkbutrfli on May 7, 2009 12:01 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree with you, but I’m going to fight against you anyway. How juvenile can they get?

The energy spent on opposition is incredible. It says very clearly that Republicans must consider health care reform. But instead of seeing that the D’s and R’s could work together on this issue, they spend all their energy detailing an “opposition” to the very issue they agree with.

I can see very clearly why the GOP is in such a terrible position. It won’t change if they spend all their time and energy coming up with new and clever ways to divide this country even more.

The GOP never cease to amaze me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thoughtful reform.
Posted by: BeckyD on May 8, 2009 4:03 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In countries with government run healthcare, politicians make your healthcare decisions. They decide if you’ll get the procedure you need, or if you are disqualified because the treatment is too expensive or because you are too old.

If Luntz’s despicable lies sound like scare tactics, they are.


Perhaps, but there's also some truth in this. I have a good friend with a chronic disease who is very active in online groups where she connects with others with her disease from around the world. Her level of treatment here is hands down better than what the people from national health system countries get.

Another friend from the UK lost her mother to cancer, and I was astounded at the delays and lack of treatment options compared to my own mother's battle with cancer here. I'm not against health care reform, but these kind of experiences can't just be ignored or discounted as 'anecdotal.' There are too many anecdotes, and too many wealth Canadians and others who come to the US for MRIs, tests, treatments and surgeries with no waiting.

Reform, yes, but let's keep what works in this system, please.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Thoughtful reform. Posted by: lively56
» RE: Thoughtful reform. Posted by: Word Mix
» Read more carefully Posted by: sliver
Does This Mean...?
Posted by: madmac10 on May 8, 2009 6:12 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...That if a conservative does come up with honest, viable solutions to our health care crisis, we will welcome them into our tent with open arms? Please think carefully before answering.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Unfortunately ... Posted by: mrbailey47
insurance
Posted by: waterboarer on May 8, 2009 6:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i get frustrated every time i hear "health-care reform" or even just "health-care". why? because i believe the core of the problem isn't affordable health-care as covered by the media. what everyone is really talking about is insurance. the current translation of affordable health-care, or access to health-care, is really getting everyone on an insurance plan.

it's time to take insurance out of the health-care equation. screw the insurance companies. everyone talks about the cost to employers, employees, retirees. what they mean, are the insurance costs to these people. why do we have to continue to support the insurance structure?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: insurance and economy Posted by: Word Mix
try this
Posted by: waterboarer on May 8, 2009 6:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
try this out...replace the word care, with insurance, everytime health-care is uttered.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here's the difference
Posted by: sliver on May 8, 2009 7:24 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The story said Frank Luntz was all pissed off that his memo was leaked. For comparison, I went to Celinda Lake's web site, and found several links to completed studies.

Luntz and the Republicans want to keep their information secret and use it to win their battles and make money doing it. Democrats want to share their information so that everyone can arrive at the best solution together.

It's clear which team is on our side.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Abject Lies
Posted by: LeaderofMen on May 8, 2009 7:34 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
“If some bureaucrat puts himself between you and your doctor, denying you
exactly what you need, that’s a crisis.” And the best: “If you have to wait weeks for
tests and months for treatment, that’s a healthcare crisis.”


Insurance companies currently deny procedures 24/7/365 because they are FOR PROFIT companies designed specifically to skim money off the top of the current healthcare industry. Neocons who are in the business right now of crafting a totally separate DENIAL system of healthcare prove once again they are mentally ill. Neocons are now nearly describable in the DSM-IV. They are mentally ill because they are in the business of hate, denial, and ignorance. They despise progress, science and reality - and are DAILY proving it with their spokesmen and women, the laws they propose and their continued crafting of ways to prevent equal rights for all in this country.

Americans are best served by doing the following: shouting down any GOPer whenever they open their mouths. The time for 'debate' is over. They had 8 years to make this a better place to live and they failed utterly and miserably. Their time is through. Done. Over.

The election of Obama and the grand cleanup of Congress that threw out the sick GOP f*cks (Santorum, Allen, soon: Coleman) proves we want a new direction free from the constraints of a false world view (eg, conservatism).

Again - and how can I possibly emphasize this more - if the neocon way were good for America we would already be harvesting fresh bushels of their goodness. Instead, this is what they brought us: a melted down economy, worldwide disdain for the American brand, an unsustainable drain of a war in Iraq, a Constitution in crisis, torture and the complete ignorance of the conventions of war, the despicable mixture of fundie religion with our gov't, liars on the SCOTUS. The list is nearly ENDLESS.

Healthcare in other industrialized nations has already been fixed and taken care of as a national issue. The fact that the GOP continues to obstruct this issue, lie about it publically, and actively campaigns against reform proves to us that they HATE AMERICA.

Vote the f*ckwads out. Do it before they come after you by breaking your door down and leading you to the back of a van in a blindfold. Because, honestly, they won't stop their insanity until everyone they hate is taken away in that fashion, or a similar fashion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Single Payor is the only way to go.
Posted by: waterflaws on May 8, 2009 8:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Keeping private insurance companies in the mix will just result in them profiting, not us.

The Right LOVES any plan that they don't have to pay for (they call it "free market"). They love it even more if THEY make money doing it. Healthcare shouldn't be about profit, it should be about the health of our society - ALL OF IT.

Progressive's biggest problem is that we fear "our" government won't hold anyone accountable for problems - just as it has been doing, for years - Republican AND Democrat.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Keeping the vocabulary straight
Posted by: Ashoka911 on May 8, 2009 9:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From an emergency physician at the fraying ends of the social fabric....

1) A Health Care system and a Medical Care system is not the same thing (though related). Health care is more about forrests and less about trees. It includes the mechanism to provide medical (especially primary)care. The US has advanced medical care and terrible health care.

2) A single party payer system, does not preclude private supplemental insurance. What we should be talking about is a Single party Payer for basic health care services. The idea that someone with extra means will somehow be blocked from accessing their health care provider and especially emergency care is absurd and is a terrorist tactic.

3)As soon as the Clinton administration started talking about "Managed Competition" (of insurance companies) Health care reform DIED. Insurance companies CAN NOT be expected to work against their interest. They should not be part a single party payor decider. Supplemental insurance ? Maybe

4) We have to keep redirecting the conversation. When we say Single party payor, they sell the idea that we are "Socializing Medicine" and that health care providers will be forced to wear Mao caps or something! Single party payer means sociallizing insurance , not having doctors and nurses employed by the government. There is a difference. Insurance companies are vulnerable now from all sides. GO GETEM !!!

5) Everybodies choices and relationships with the health care system is endangered by having 45,000,000 uninsured. Care in emergency departments is a right even now, but they are so clogged up with the uninsured that the emergency care system is often disabled.

FOCUS , FOCUS, FOCUS. This is a war of language and concepts. Now the GOPs only strategy is to confuse everybody and take the wind out of reform. They will do this with language. Control the vocabulary and we can see this through...maybe.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Corporate Lobbyists
Posted by: Urgelt on May 8, 2009 9:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A funny thing happened during the last 8 years of Republican rule.

Social conservatives felt used and marginalized. They supported Bush. They supported Republicans. And what they got was lip service. Every time ideology collided with corporate interests, corporate interests won.

That's a large part of the anger they are feeling right now, and it's a large part of the reason Republicans are unable to float a message which resonates with much of anyone. Social conservatives are taking their cues now not from Republicans but from media personalities on Fox and talk radio (and, of course, the old guard TV evangelists).

So now Obama and the Democrats have a solid grip on the government machine. And how do progressives feel?

Used and marginalized. Wherever ideology collides with corporate interests, corporate interests win.

Make no mistake. The predominant reason health care costs have soared is the market power of large corporations have made it soar, unrestrained by government. We're talking about oligopolies and extractive pricing.

Anything which reduces the wild profits drug companies and insurers are able to rake off of health care will be opposed by those industries. What progressives think won't matter much. Our government is dominated by corporate money.

There is a simple reason that the insurance industry does not want any expansion of government-operated health insurance. It will reduce their profit. They do not want to compete with low-overhead insurance. Indeed, they may not be able to compete with it.

This is the litmus test for progressives. Whatever else the government does, if it does not include government-operated insurance options, our agenda will have failed.

Obama seems to want government-operated insurance. But like Clinton, he has already shown how willing he is to bend over backwards for large corporate interests. A true skeptic would view the Democratic strategy right now not as a push for progressive reform, but as angling for the best deal from their corporate sponsors, holding the threat of progressivism over their heads in order to extract largess, and gratitude, from industry lobbyists.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Otto
Posted by: otto on May 8, 2009 11:36 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A good way to start is to get this information and article on Lutz publicized so that most of the public can see the GOP hypocricy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It has to be about universal CARE, not universal INSURANCE
Posted by: truthlover on May 8, 2009 12:54 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Forget about universal health insurance, that’s not what’s needed, and it’s not what should be even discussed. The point is, everyone should be able to get CARE.

Doctors should be the ones who decide whether a patient gets a certain type of care or test, and these services should be available to all.

No one is on the public’s side until they ban health insurance that can make a profit, refuse coverage or refuse a prescibed treatment to anyone.

Most civilized countries have single-payer health care, the rest have NON-profit insurance companies ONLY, who MUST cover everyone who applies, and who MUST cover ALL treatments prescribed – no quibbling. Full coverage is provided from public funds for the less affluent, so that everyone has care.

Yes, in case you missed it, any country that doesn’t have universal healthcare is NOT a civilized country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DO 64-65 YEAR OLDS FEAR MEDICARE? USE THIS AGAINST EVERY STUPID RIGHT WING SOB
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on May 9, 2009 12:04 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that starts echoing the right wing lies. The evidence is right in front of everyone's face. We do need to add a full federal program to Medicare. I suggest that we merely expand the VA hospital system to everybody that so desires. It would call for a massive expansion.

The best VA hospitals are tied to medical schools. Veterans use the VA when they have the choice of Medicare because the VA has no co-pay. They fill all of the prescriptions. The correct answer is to allow a multiplicity of choices. A few will want to keep their private insurance. The British still have a few private medical practioners. They certainly aren't illegal.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

johngary66
Posted by: johngary66 on May 9, 2009 2:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I totally agree. If anyone here is outraged about Bankers pay and bonus's they should know about what is going on in private health insurance. They claim they make a fair profit and that's all. Maybe some do, but not United Health Care one of the largest in the country. They made enough profit to pay their CEO Dr. William McGuire an average of close to $58 million a year for the six years prior to his retirement in disgrace in 2006. That is when the executive pay board voted to give him stock options valued at Approximately $1.7 BILLION dollars. Part of the value was that they were backdated. Not content with the outrageous sum, he wanted the stock backdated to make it more valuable. That's when his problems and the companies problems with the SEC began. The company paid the SEC the largest fine ever issued of $7 million dollars. After stock holder suits and fines etc. McGuire eventually was forced to return about $600 million dollars. Poor baby! My question is, how many claims had to be denied, how much did premiums have to be raised to make enough profit for just this one employee? He brought huge profits to the stock holders. How? Is anybody even a little outraged that Insurance companies are being brought to the table? Since our representatives are well paid by these companies, your going to have to scream bloody murder if you want a single payer system to ever be considered.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: johngary66 Posted by: doneman2000
The bad guys will win again, folks
Posted by: willymack on May 9, 2009 10:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In fact, they've ALREADY won. The fix is in. This is a case when both money AND bullshit talk. The ONLY way universal health care, without the participation of the insurance and drug rackets, will happen is if the racketeers go to jail or die.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

10% of Pentagon budget would cover 100% of healthcare
Posted by: Snowpuppy on May 9, 2009 10:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just bought a pair of Armani frames with prescription tinted lenses for $80 US - in Canada. A savings of $220 off US prices. They have 100% universal healthcare right next door - I didn't hear anyone crying about it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]