Special interests to FDR: “National health care is un-American, a threat to capitalism, nay, slavery!” (Sound familiar?)
Friday, 08/21/2009 - 10:28 am by David Woolner | One Comment
Roosevelt historian David Woolner shines a light on today’s issues with lessons from the past.
It would appear that President Obama’s determination to hold a healthy national debate about the reform of our health care system has fallen victim to the same sort of rhetorical excess that plagued health reform advocates in FDR’s day. With some opponents accusing the Administration of trying to establish a “socialist state” and others equating the Administration’s quest for reform to an attempt to pursue “Nazis policies,” the much needed conversation about what role the government should play in insuring the health of its citizens has largely dissipated into an incoherent shouting match. This is unfortunate. If it continues, it may threaten the ability of Congress and the Administration to bring about meaningful reform—or worse—it may kill the effort entirely.
Evidence for this can be found in the ill-fated attempts to push health reform through Congress during the height of the New Deal, when, according to FDR’s trusted confidant, Harry Hopkins, some form of comprehensive health insurance had perhaps the best chance of passage it would ever have. In 1935, there was serious discussion within the Roosevelt Administration, spearheaded by FDR’s Committee on Economic Security—about whether or not to include a health insurance provision within the legislation that established Social Security. Due to the vehement opposition of the America Medical Association (AMA) and other bodies, as well as the widespread fear among Administration officials that including health care in the legislation would kill the entire Social Security effort—the health care provision was dropped.
In 1939 health care reform once again became a possibility when Senator Robert Wagner introduced a bill that was inspired in part by FDR’s Technical Committee on Medical Care—a body which issued a report in 1938 that among other things called for an expansion public health services through Federal grants-in-aid to states for “medically needy persons.” In spite of its rather limited scope, opposition to Wagner’s national health bill among the medical establishment was equally strong and with the onset of the war in Europe in September his efforts came to a swift halt.
Undaunted, Senator Wagner took up the cause once more in 1943 with the Wagner-Murray-Dingell bill. This act called for a “single unified system of national social insurance” that would be administered by the states and combine traditional employment security provisions with health insurance, paid for by a payroll tax on employers and employees.
As noted in Phillip J. Funigiello’s excellent book Chronic Politics: Health Care Security from FDR to George W. Bush, the Wagner-Murray-Dingell bill marked the start of a political debate over health care reform that continues to this day. The differences between its proponents—health care reformers, organized labor, the National Farmers Union, the “medical New Dealers”—and its opponents—the AMA, the insurance companies, the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association, the American Hospital Association, the American Bar Association and others—were sharp and deep. Moreover, while those in favor of reform remained somewhat divided over some of the details of its execution, the principle weapons of its opponents were not nearly so complex—in short, they boiled down to rhetoric and money.
The Insurance Economic Society of America, for example, characterized government involvement in health insurance as “an issue of human rights versus state slavery;” other called it “un-American” and a threat to the system of free enterprise. Leading figures within the AMA accused the government of trying to establish socialism in America and huge sums of money were expended by the AMA and other powerful groups to drive home these points.
The net effect of these accusations was to make it impossible for the country to engage in a rational political discussion not only about health care, but also about the fundamental nature of our society and the role of government in a liberal, capitalist democracy. As a consequence, six decades later the United States remains the only major industrialized nation without a comprehensive national health care system and over 40 million Americans currently go uninsured.
Meanwhile the charges that were leveled in FDR’s day have come back to haunt us with a vengeance—amplified by a media shamelessly hungry for sensationalized “news.” Sadly, we seem to live in a world where the extreme has become mainstream; where empty rhetoric has replaced rational debate; where our politicians are more interested in appealing to their “base” than in exercising leadership. History, it appears, is tragically repeating itself, much to the detriment of the health of the American people.
Braintruster David Woolner is senior vice president of the Roosevelt Institute.





























































When these programs were being considered in the Roosevelt Administration, opinions about them on either side were largely freely formed. We had a functioning democracy in those days. Today, all claim of there being open discussion of these questions is utter pretense. Those permitted to have a role in the discourse are confined to the whoring political bacteria whose convictions are fixed in advance by proffered, lobbyist campaign cash and to them alone. And one of the most prominent of these, of course, is our President, Barak Obama himself. Honestly, would you expect anything forward looking to emerge at all in such a context?
We’ve had our democracy stolen from us by a clique of the very people elected to preserve it together with their financial, drug, arms, and Middle Eastern foreign policy interest paymasters. The franchise is an abstraction, holding an assessed value of roughly two dead flies. Until our political institutions are remade in a fashion precluding the abuses that they and the people they are were brought into being to benefit have had imposed on them, all talk of public health care or anything else, frankly, is insane. And it is simply too late to expect that we will be voting our way out of this one.
Posted by Andrei Vyshinsky | August 21st, 2009 at 4:30 pm