Now, Why Would He Say That?

Apropos to the last post and the anti-democratic structural problems with the over-representation of "Small States" in the Senate, and their senators, who, conveniently happen to lead in corporate PAC-money and dominate the main committee responsible for health care reform legislation, the Table for Six-----we now see one of its members, Sen. Chuck Grassley, endorsing the private-insurance-lobby-created-myth about government "death panels"(Good pieces on the lie's primary author, Betsy McCaughey of the Hudson Institute, and her history of lying here, here, and here). Surprising? Just how surprising, we'll see below. But again, I think Nate Silver's analysis goes a long way in explaining the appropriate context for understanding how and why this kind of brazen disinformation would be coming from one of the committee's members.



Grassley's comments are extremely interesting considering that in the past Republicans have supported Medicare reimbursements for "voluntary counseling sessions for end-of-life decisions." Sadly, there should be no confusion about this for Mr. Grassley. The supposed "death panel" provision, introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), has recently been co-sponsored by two others in his very own party: Rep. Charles Boustany (R-La.) and Rep. Patrick Tiberi (R-Ohio). And in his own Senate, Democrat Jay Rockefeller (W.V.) has a bill that also includes provisions for end-of-life counseling, also co-sponsored by a Republican, Senator Susan Collins (Maine). A similar bill waaaaay back in 2007 also had two Republican co-sponsors along with Collins----Richard Lugar, (R-Ind.) and John Isakson, (R-Ga.). Isakson even recently told the Post

How someone could take an end of life directive or a living will as that ["death panel"] is nuts. You're putting the authority in the individual rather than the government. I don't know how that got so mixed up.

While Silver's analysis does shed some light on the structural reasons that might explain Grassley's shenanigans, there are more immediate causes. One of the anti-health reform groups behind loads of this mis/disinformation, Coalition to Protect Patients’ Rights, is managed by DCI, a lobbying firm formed in 1996 by a former staffer of Sen. Grassley's, Tom Synhorst (with help from Bob Dole, and right-wing operatives, Doug Goodyear and Tim Hyde). According to Think Progress, DCI's other public relations/"grassroots" accomplishments include:

1. The DCI Group was retained by the pharmaceutical industry to whip up public opposition against House legislation that would permit the reimportation of FDA approved drugs from Canada and elsewhere [free-markets, right?]. [Washington Monthly,December/2003]

2. The DCI Group worked with Republicans to form various “grassroots” front groups to amplify President Bush’s call to privatize Social Security. [Center for Media and Democracy, 3/18/05]

3. Chris LaCivita, a former DCI Group staffer, took a lead role in organizing the Swift Boat Veterans campaign to smear John Kerry and his war record. [CommonDreams, 8/31/04]

4. The DCI Group was behind spoof videos mocking Al Gore and global warming. The firm has been retained by ExxonMobil to lobby. [Wall Street Journal, 8/3/06; Exxon Secrets, accessed 7/28/09

One shouldn't think too hard on Grassley's motivations, I guess, but does it not seem eminently inappropriate for him to sit on the most important committee for deciding the fate of health care reform?

And going back to Silver: If he's right that corporate PACs target small-state senators, for all the reasons mentioned in the last post, we would see things like this: Insurance Industry Is Targeting Blue Dogs To Shape Health Reform In Its Favor.

So far $52 million has been spent on health care ads: $23 million spent on ads vaguely supporting "reform," and $29 million from the opposition. Yet, Ken Johnson of PhRMA knows where best to invest:

Most of it will come in targeted congressional districts where our companies have a significant economic presence, or in districts where members [of Congress] can still be persuaded to support comprehensive health-care reform.

Read: Blue Dogs from "Small States," with "comprehensive health-care reform" meaning barely any reform at all.

Of course, small-state senators aren't the only ones being targeted, though only one is apparently saying he'll kill reform because of all the liberal ads attacking him. After running television spots in Arkansas, Nevada and North Dakota last month, the Republican National Committee is going after "60 congressional districts in 33 states" and running ads "in the districts of four Blue Dog Democrats: Reps. Zack Space (Ohio), Baron P. Hill (Ind.), Bart Gordon (Tenn.) and Mike Ross (Ark.)." As a result, we should see a lot more ads like this one claiming that the health care reform bill will pay for abortions while denying legitimate procedures to the elderly. And we all know in which states they'll be running.

Anyways, in spite of all the irrational and irresponsible behavior surrounding the health care "debate," at least there's irony like this for supporters of substantial health care reform to discuss at the water cooler: an anti-health reform activist injured at a town hall meeting now seeking donations for his injuries. You see, he's lost his job, and hasn't got any insurance. Or maybe we can sit back and laugh while being scared to death by people like this guy:

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Apparently, he agrees with Grassley that there is something to fear. Where could all this be coming from?