Standards and Integrity

Last year, I wrote an article, “Gaffe in the Eye of the Beholder.” It was about the media’s coverage of the mistakes or gaffes Mr. Obama made during the presidential campaign. I compared Mr. Obama’s gaffes with the other candidates, and with President Bush’s gaffes. Mr. Bush made numerous gaffes during the presidential campaigns in 2000 and 2004 and as president of the United States.

There was a gaffe that I wanted to use in my article. It was attributed to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Mr. Romney was alleged to have said, “Hamas is a great example of a faith based organization.” The joke being Mr. Romney did not know Hamas is a terrorist organization.

I searched the Internet for a reliable source confirming Mr. Romney made the statement. There were a couple of Blogs that corroborated the story, but I could not find a reliable source from the print media confirming the gaffe. I decided not to include the gaffe in the article.

There is a good chance the gaffe was created by the fertile mind of a late night comedian. Mr. Romney is prone to gaffes and misstatements, like when he said his father marched for civil rights in the 1960’s. That statement was proven false. But I did not want to include an apocryphal statement in my essay.

The same can be said of the alleged Sarah Palin gaffe in which she said Africa is a country. Comedians use that statement to demonstrate Ms Palin’s lack of intelligence, but the statement attributed to Ms Palin is also doubtful.

My Blog sites (MelvinReveron.blogspot.com and CheLenin.blogspot.com) are not widely read. My articles will not be quoted in the Main Stream Media. But I have standards. I may not have hundreds of readers, but I still have to respect the process. I will not use a quote out of context. I will credit my source of information in the endnotes.

Unfortunately, Fox News does not have the same standards.

President Obama delivered an address to a joint session of Congress on September 9, 2009 to persuade Congress and Americans on the need for health care reform

Fox News commentator Sean Hannity analyzed the speech with Republican pollster Frank Luntz. Mr. Hannity was appalled with a statement from President Obama.

“One of the things, Frank, you have been very, very clear about… is this tendency to go negative,” Mr. Hannity said. “And he had a very different tone on Monday, but when he said tonight that insurance executives are bad people, it took me back because it was so harsh, and I think unfair, but it’s part of their polling.”[i]

Mr. Hannity should be given partial credit for showing the portion of the speech he was arguing against. The video clip proved Mr. Hannity distorted the President’s statement.

President Obama said, “Insurance executives don’t do this because they’re bad people; they do it because it’s profitable.”[ii]

Mr. Hannity created a story by claiming President Obama said, “insurance executives are bad people.”

The distortion was deliberate. Most Fox viewers will not watch a speech delivered by President Obama. The only source Fox viewers will count on for information about President Obama will be from Fox commentators.

Fox News is not a news channel. Fox News does not report news. It creates news.

Fox News is an entertainment channel. Their job is not to inform the public. Their job is to entertain their viewers - Republican, conservative, Christian, and white.

Their demographic base would not support the policies of any politician from the Democratic Party; therefore they indulge their viewers with stories that are false and with conspiracy theories. Fox News practically sponsor protest movements against President Obama.

The Hannity distortion is not the only incident of Fox creating news. Last year, Mr. Obama gave a fist bump to his wife before a speech. On June 6, 2008, Fox News TV host E.D. Hill said, “A fist bump? A pound? A terrorist fist jab? The gesture everyone seems to interpret differently.”[iii]

This “gesture” that athletes perform every day suddenly became a terrorist secret handshake. The only people who will interpret the gesture differently will be Fox viewers who will now associate the fist bump with terrorism.

Fox commentators will accuse President Obama of being a fascist/socialist/Marxist/Leninist not knowing fascism and socialism occupy opposite sides of the political spectrum.

President Obama’s birth certificate is an issue on Fox News. Conspiracy theorists who argue President Obama was really born in Kenya have a platform to vent. Other media are forced to cover the story because of Fox News’ relentless coverage.

According to Fox News, Health Care reform is a socialist plot to nationalize health care, create death panels to kill of seniors and unproductive citizens, and grant illegal immigrants access to universal health care at the expense of American citizens.

According to Fox News, President Obama speaking to children on the first day of school is a nefarious plot to indoctrinate children with socialist ideology.

Now it is patriotic to dissent against a sitting president, who received 53% of the vote, but it was unpatriotic to question President Bush’s decision to invade Iraq.

In fact, Fox News commentator Glen Beck is virtually cheerleading an armed insurrection against the federal government.

Glen Beck also perpetuates the lie that President Obama wants to abduct Americans, and force them into FEMA concentration camps for socialist indoctrination.

In college, a philosophy professor lectured the class about the First Amendment right to free speech. He argued there is a difference in having a right to express an opinion versus the right to express an intellectually sound opinion.

For example, I have the right to express the opinion that the world is flat. The government cannot interfere with me if I decide to post, “the world is flat,” on my Blog site. But I should be able to support my opinion with facts.

The purpose of the First Amendment is persuade, not simply to express. The government is not allowed to suppress persuasive speech. I have the right to say something stupid. The government will not try to stop me from saying stupid because it is unnecessary.

But the government cannot suppress my right to say health care reform is bad because it is too expensive, and President Obama has not been able to clearly explain how he intends to pay for the program.

By the way, this is a legitimate conservative argument against President Obama’s health care reform package, but you will not hear this argument in the Main Stream Media because it is not as controversial as death panels and covering illegal aliens.

Freedom of the press should have the same intellectual standards. The government cannot suppress my right to publish an article stating the moon landing in 1969 was filmed in a Hollywood studio. It is a conspiracy theory, but it is not based on fact; therefore the federal government would have no interest in suppressing this article.

But the government cannot suppress my right to publish an article arguing for withdrawing troops from Iraq because I am trying to persuade other people that it is in our economic interests to leave Iraq. We cannot afford to continue occupying a foreign country, especially when Iraqis want our troops to leave.

The goal of Fox News is not to inform or to persuade. It is to entertain their viewers. Fox News has the constitutional right to broadcast news, but it does not have the intellectual right to call it news.

I will not publish false statements or distortions on my Blog because I have standards and integrity and I respect freedom of speech and freedom of the press.

Fox News cannot make that claim.


[i] Media Matters for America, “Hannity Falsely Claimed Obama Called Insurance Execs Bad People,” September 10, 2009.
[ii] Media Matters for America, “Hannity Falsely Claimed Obama Called Insurance Execs Bad People,” September 10, 2009.
[iii] Media Matters for America, “Fox E.D. Hill Teased Discussion of Obama Dap: A Fist Bump? A Pound? A Terrorist Fist Jab?” June 6, 2008.

Failure to Communicate

President Obama will address a joint session of Congress on September 9, 2009 to speak about health care reform.

It is the hardest and strangest argument to make in American politics, to convince Americans that a health care system in which a person can select their own doctor, make a modest co-payment, and have the federal government pay the balance of the medical bill is worst than the current system that leaves millions uninsured, discriminates against people with preexisting medical conditions, and results in millions more of Americans facing bankruptcy.

At a Florida town hall meeting, a woman said, “I am a single uninsured mother of an uninsured child, yet still do not want the government involved in my health care.”[i]

Protesters have disrupted congressional town hall meetings with false arguments, disgracing our democracy.

Yet President Obama has failed to convince Americans that reforming health care is necessary.

It is not entirely the President’s fault. Republicans are refusing to cooperate with the Democratic President.

The Main Stream Media (MSM) has focused on congressional town hall meetings that are being disrupted by angry citizens.

Republicans, conservatives and the MSM have colluded to distort provisions in the health care reform bill.

Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin commented on her Facebook page that President Obama’s health care bill would create a Death Panel that would essentially decide who is worthy of health care. Senior citizens, the infirmed, the disabled, and her youngest child would be denied coverage because they are not productive citizens.

Ms Palin was referring to a provision in the health care bill that would pay for consultations with doctors over end of life medical procedures.

A patient and a doctor discuss what types of treatment the patient will permit in the event of incapacitation, to prevent family members from trying to guess what the patient really would have wanted. The consultation would also prevent family members from making the difficult decision of when to end treatment.

Ms Palin, the Republicans, and the MSM refuse to acknowledge that the United States already has death panels. They are called HMO’s. Health insurance companies make decisions on who lives and who dies, not based on a productivity formula, but on the impact on the company’s profits. If medical treatment costs too much, then there is a good possibility insurance companies will not pay. In our current health care system, inability to pay is enough to deny medical treatment.

We have an exclusive health care system. It excludes people without money from medical treatment.

Liberals, progressives, socialists, communists, Martians, Vulcans, and the Creature from the Black Lagoon want to create an inclusive health care system, a system that will cover every American man, woman and child, regardless of their ability to pay.

The President has failed to convince Americans that an inclusive health care system is better than an exclusive health care system.

To borrow a quote from a movie, “What we’ve got here is failure to communicate…

“Some men you just can’t reach.” The President insists on working with Republicans even though it is obvious Republicans are not interested in health care reform. “Which is the way he wants it. Well, he gets it.”[ii]

The President’s failure to communicate is due to his administration’s failure to follow some basic public policy rules.

First rule in public policy, define the problem.

President Obama correctly argues that there are 48 million uninsured Americans. HMO’s drop sick people from their coverage. Individuals with preexisting medical conditions are denied health insurance. Americans cannot afford to pay their medical bills.

Stories help. A master communicator like President Obama could use stories from ordinary Americans who have had problems with HMO’s, or did not have health insurance.

The President included stories of ordinary Americans in his August 16, 2009 Op-Ed article published in the New York Times.

A self-employed woman cannot get health insurance because she has Hepatitis C.[iii]

Another woman cannot get health insurance because of injuries she sustained in an accident when she was five years old.[iv]

“A man lost his health coverage in the middle of chemotherapy because the insurance company discovered that he had gallstones, which he hadn’t known about when he applied for his policy. Because his treatment was delayed, he died.”[v]

President Obama could use a high profile incident to justify the need for health care reform.

Heather Sherba was one of the twelve innocent victims who were shot by a deranged gunman at the LA Fitness in Collier Township in Pennsylvania. She is 22 years old. Ms Sherba’s age disqualifies her from her parents health insurance plan. She is unemployed, and cannot afford to buy health insurance on her own. Ms Sherba will probably not be able to obtain health insurance because she has a preexisting medical condition – a gunshot wound in her right leg.[vi]

If Ms Sherba gets married, her husband’s health insurance company could deny medical coverage for his wife because she has a preexisting condition.

Ms Sherba’s family and friends tried to raise money to pay her medical expenses by washing cars. They were able to raise about $500.00.

Ordinary citizens forced to wash cars to pay medical bills shames our country.

Ms Sherba had the unfortunate luck of getting shot in a gym by a total stranger, and is probably carrying a five figure hospital bill she cannot afford to pay. She was the victim of a random act of violence. That random act of violence left Ms Sherba uninsurable.

Health care reform is personal for two reasons. First, I am an asthmatic, but I have not had an asthma attack since 1984. I make an effort to take care of myself, but what would prevent my health insurance from dropping me if get a life threatening disease?

Second, my father was afflicted with a medical condition in the mid 90’s. He does not like hospitals. He tried to tough out the medical condition, but it was painful, and one night the pain was too great to endure. My sister took him to a private hospital. He was examined. The doctors determined he needed surgery. He was being prepared for surgery when my sister was asked to produce his health insurance card. She informed the hospital official that he did not have insurance. Surgery was cancelled. My father was given a list of over the counter pills he could purchase at a GNC. The pills would reduce the pain.

But the pain did not go away. My father was a member of a union, but he had no health insurance through his employer or the union.

Some time later, my father went to a municipal hospital. Municipal hospitals cannot refuse a patient without health insurance. He underwent surgery, but the doctors discovered one of his kidneys was severely infected during the operation. After the operation, the doctors tried to save the kidney, but the damage was too great.

My father is Spanish dominant. He asked me to be with him at the hospital, to talk to the doctors, and get some answers. The doctor informed me that the infected kidney would have to be removed.

I did not have the heart to tell my father that he lost a kidney, so I lied to him. I told him the doctors were going to open him up again to get a better look, and if the kidney could be saved, then it would. Otherwise, the doctors would have to remove the infected kidney.

My father was in the hospital for one month. He underwent two surgeries. If not for Medicaid, the hospital bill would have bankrupted our entire family.

My father should not be have been denied medical care because he did not have the ability to pay a medical bill.

The President should have also argued companies cannot afford to pay health insurance for their employees.

Small companies cannot grow because of the rising cost of insuring their employees.

The President’s argument would be stronger if he framed the argument as a civil rights issue, instead of a financial issue.

It is wrong to discriminate and deny health insurance against individuals with preexisting medical conditions.

It is wrong to discriminate and deny health coverage to individuals based on their inability to pay.

Second rule of public policy; propose a solution to the defined problem.

President Obama did not offer a specific set of solutions. He wanted Congress to participate in the process of reforming health care. Congress had the latitude to create a bill, but the President wanted a public option in the health care bill. The public option would compete with health insurance companies. The public option would also give access to health insurance to uninsured and uninsurable Americans.

President Obama’s failure is more pronounced in this phase of public policy because the solution became fragmented when he granted Congress the latitude to create its own health care reform bill.

Liberals argued for a single payer system. Conservatives argued for a market based solution. More competition will reduce the costs of obtaining health care insurance.

The American fringe element argued nationalizing health care would release the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

The urgency to pass health care reform was lost when President Obama handed the responsibility to Congress. The President should have offered a concrete solution to a specific problem to a nation that collectively suffers from Attention Deficit Disorder.

In the absence of a single payer, Medicare for every American health care system, President Obama should have instructed Congress to create a hybrid health care system.

The hybrid system would consist of private health insurance companies, and a public health insurance option. Anyone who is happy and confident with their medical insurance can continue to pay for the service.

But public health insurance is necessary for those Americans who cannot afford health insurance, are denied health insurance because of a preexisting medical condition, or their employers do not offer health insurance. The public option is a safety net to insure Americans have access to health care.

Third rule of public policy; how to pay for health care program.

The method of paying for President Obama’s health care reform bill is vague. He argues that two-thirds of the money will come from savings from modernizing medical records, more cost efficient procedures, and savings from other programs. The other one-third will come from increasing taxes on individuals who earn more than $250,000.00 per year.

I understand the raising taxes part, but I have trouble understanding where the two-thirds part will come from. Americans are correct to be skeptical about funding a program, as large as health care reform, from nebulous revenue sources. Accounting tricks rarely work.

Paying for health care reform requires ingenuity, an independent revenue source.

There are approximately 305 million people in the United States. Americans spend money. We buy take-out food, books, magazines, clothes, office supplies, computers, video games, groceries, flat screen TV’s, cars, houses, etc. We go to the movies, sporting events, amusement parks, and casinos.

In 2007, 56 million tourists visited the United States. Tourists also spend money; mostly on stuff Americans don’t buy.

The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the United States was approximately $14 trillion in 2008. Suppose 10 cents on any item purchased in the United States is reserved in a health care fund.

The ten-cent surcharge would be a flat fee. If I spend $7,000 on a used car, ten-cents goes into the national health insurance fund.

If I buy a hotdog and a beer at a baseball game, ten-cents from the beer and hotdog combo, and ten-cents from the ticket to the baseball game goes to the national health insurance fund.

If I go to the supermarket, and spend $60.00 on groceries, ten-cents goes into the national health insurance fund.

Medical treatment will not be free. Americans will continue to make $10 or $20 co-payments when they go to the doctor, and when they get a prescription filled at a pharmacy.

In addition, working Americans will continue to fund the national insurance fund through the Medicare taxes withheld from their paychecks.

The national health care fund will be continually replenished as long as Americans and tourists continue to spend money.

This alternate revenue stream could fund a universal Medicare program.

With these public policy rules, the problem was clearly identified, a reasoned solution is proposed, and a method to fund the program was offered.

Conservatives argue a single payer system is socialist, fascist, and tyrannical.

In his speech on Wednesday, President Obama should argue for health care reform by borrowing from one of President Roosevelt’s famous “Four Freedoms” speech. Two of the freedoms apply to the health care debate: Freedom from want. Freedom from fear.

Health care reform is founded on two essential freedoms. Freedom from want. Americans should not be deprived of medical care.

Freedom from fear. Americans should not be afraid of getting sick. Americans should not fear crushing debt resulting from an illness.

Americans should not dread receiving a letter from their health insurance indicating a medical bill will not be paid.

Parents should not be afraid of the financial consequences of a sick child.

Medicare for all is liberating, not tyrannical. Americans should live in the comfort of knowing that their country will be there for them when they are sick and vulnerable, when Americans need help the most.

And remember, the people arguing against national health insurance have health insurance.


[i] Michael McAuliff, “Fear and Loathing, Not Always Facts Fuel Health Care Forums in Florida and Country: Undercover Report,” New York Daily News, August 31, 2009.
[ii] Cool Hand Luke, 1967.
[iii] Barack Obama, “Why We Need Health Care Reform,” New York Times, August 16, 2009.
[iv] Barack Obama, “Why We Need Health Care Reform,” New York Times, August 16, 2009.
[v] Barack Obama, “Why We Need Health Care Reform,” New York Times, August 16, 2009.
[vi] Rachel Maddow Show, September 2, 2009.