How Health Lobbyists Influenced Reform Bill - Essay Example

How Health Lobbyists Influenced Reform Bill INTRODUCTION This paper reviews the coverage of the ongoing debate over “Health Care Reform” in the mainstream media. The paper follows the guidelines set forth in the case study in the book “Media and Culture” (Pages 525-531). I have located six journalistic news stories related to Health Care reform using the Proquest Database and in the following sections I review the coverage using the guidelines presented in the case. There has been a lot of bad blood between the Republicans and Democrats over this issue and hence the news coverage of the issue is something that offers fascinating insights into the working of the legislative branch of the US government. To give an overview of the case, Health Care reform has eluded US Presidents for more than a century. Each Democratic president since the 1970’s has tried their hand at reforming health care and the most notable failure was that of the Clinton Administration. The current legislation has been passed by the House and Senate but is awaiting reconciliation which means that a further vote is required. It remains to be seen whether the current initiative would succeed where others have failed or is a case of “so-near yet so-far”. DESCRIPTION In my opinion, the most balanced coverage of the issue came from the New York Times. To quote from the article, “Health care reform hangs in the balance. Its fate rests with a handful of "centrist" senators -- senators who claim to be mainly worried about whether the proposed legislation is fiscally responsible. But if they're really concerned with fiscal responsibility, they shouldn't be worried about what would happen if health reform passes. They should, instead, be worried about what would happen if it doesn't pass. For America can't get control of its budget without controlling health care costs -- and this is our last, best chance to deal with these costs in a rational way.” (Krugman, 2009). This is the most cogent analysis of the six sources that I have selected because it explains the issue in a rational manner without recourse to political and emotional overtones that characterized the coverage by the other sources. It was quite a spectacle by the Republicans who managed to confuse and obfuscate the issue by spreading such canards as “Grandma Death Panels” and the like using media outlets like Fox News in their efforts. The other source that reported the story in a balanced way was the Washington Post and I quote from the article, “The Democrats ended up focusing on health-care reform's low-hanging fruit: the bill the Senate ultimately passed does much more to increase coverage than it does to address the considerably harder problem of cost control, it strengthens the existing private insurance system and it does not include a public insurance option.” (Klein, 2009). Both these sources quoted here talk about the ballooning costs of health care if the system is not reformed. This, in my opinion, is the crux of the issue and hence attempts to derail the legislation would only exacerbate the problems with the Federal Deficit. ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION If we analyse the coverage of the Health Care Reform bill, we find that the two patterns that are visible are the need to cut costs and the intractability inherent in the legislative process in the Senate. The need to cut costs has been analysed in the previous section with the review of the sources that I quoted. The other pattern of “The System” coming in the way of the reform can be discerned as well. For instance, the coverage of the tedious process of debating and voting in the Senate, not to mention the filibuster, got attention from the Christian Science Monitor article which states, “Americans are watching closely the great healthcare reform debate of2009. They are confused and worried about the health plan taking shape in Congress -but many remain hopeful about the legislative process, as well. The voters' swirl of emotions about the issue in some ways mirrors the complexity of current healthcare legislation.” (Grier, 2009). The interpretation of these news stories indicates that the American public has been left thoroughly confused about the merits of the Health Care Bill and this is a disturbing finding. The purpose of the news media is to inform the audience and let them draw conclusions rather than confusing them with unnecessary details. Though the sources that I selected do not subscribe to this view, nonetheless the results of the polls conducted indicate that the majority of the Americans were confused. To quote from the article, “The KFF poll also asked which emotions voters have experienced while watching their elected leaders struggle with the healthcare issue. The most commonly cited was "hopeful," followed by "frustrated,""optimistic," "positive," and "confused”. (Grier, 2009) The most telling indictment of the system comes from the Chicago Tribune that talks about how lobbyists compromised the Health Care Reform Bill. To quote from the article, “In the health care showdown, insider lobbying influence has magnified the clout of corporate interests and helped steer the debate away from a public insurance option, despite many polls indicating majority support from Americans, according to Rutgers University political scientist Ross Baker.” (Zajac, 2009). EVALUATION Based on the articles surveyed, it is apparent that the Health Care Reform divided the political spectrum as well as the body polity in ways not seen since the days of Watergate. These points to a disturbing trend where the prevalence of special interests and extreme degree of partisanship are the defining features of the debate rather than the need to fix a system that is broken. The journalistic sources that I surveyed are also divided along partisan lines. For instance, the New York Times and the Washington Post echoed the need to look at the problem rationally whereas the journals like Christian Science Monitor talked about the confusion and the lack of support for the bill. Finally, the quote from the Wall Street Journal indicates how corporate media views the HCR not as an instrument of change but as an impediment. ”Liberal Democrats might attempt to spin the shocking victory of Republican Scott Brown in Massachusetts by claiming that the loss was a result of a poor campaign by Martha Coakley. Would that it were so. This was a defeat not of the messenger, but of the message--and the sooner progressive Democrats face up to that fact, the better.” (Davis, 2009).In conclusion, the purpose of the media is to present the pros and cons of the debate without resorting to hyperbole. There should not be a “spin” on the stories and they should be as factual as possible. However, as the coverage of the Health Care Reform shows, the media is also contributing to the partisan nature of the debate though it is a fact that the reporting is still world class and not yet degenerated into slanging matches like what we see on Television. Sources Andrew Zajac.  "How health lobbyists influenced reform bill: Ex-lawmakers, ex-staffers push industry agenda.” Chicago Tribune 20 Dec. 2009, Chicago Tribune, Proquest. Web.  15 Feb. 2010. David M Herszenhorn.  "STATE DIFFERENCES HAMPER HEALTH CARE REFORM.” Pittsburgh Post - Gazette 31 Jan. 2010, ProQuest National Newspapers Premier, Proquest. Web.  15 Feb. 2010. Ezra Klein.  "After health care, we need Senate reform.” The Washington Post 27 Dec. 2009, ProQuest National Newspapers Premier, Proquest. Web.  15 Feb. 2010. Lanny J. Davis.  "Blame the Left for Massachusetts; Democrats should be willing to seek common-ground reforms.” Wall Street Journal (Online) 20 Jan. 2010, ABI/INFORM Global, Proquest. Web.  15 Feb. 2010. Paul Krugman.  "Reform Or Else: [Op-Ed].” New York Times 4 Dec. 2009, Late Edition (East Coast): Proquest National Newspapers Premier, Proquest. Web.  15 Feb. 2010. Peter Grier.  "As health care reform bill advances, public support slips: More Americans oppose the health care reform bill than support it, according to two recent polls. The public also expresses confusion about the legislation, though people are more engaged on the issue than when the Clinton administration attempted health reform... ”The Christian Science Monitor 22 Dec. 2009, ProQuest National Newspapers Premier, Proquest. Web.  15 Feb. 2010. Read More