Note: I authored an article about the national health care debate and ongoing protests for the Kansas City Metro Voice (www.metrovoicenews.com) for the September issue. The Metro Voice is a monthly Christian newspaper.

Due to space limitations, some of my article was cut out in the editing process. I'm posting it here in full.

 

The Health Care Debate: Proponents, Opponents and the Christian Perspective to Protests

By Mike Ferguson (Special to the Kansas City Metro Voice)

“Our freedoms are not safe unless we as citizens interest ourselves in government, inform ourselves about it and involve ourselves in it.” – Ronald Reagan

Very few issues before government have engaged so many people with such intensity as the current debate over a proposal that would create a national, government-run health care system in the United States.

While there are a few bills that have been filed, the main proposal that is under consideration – and is the main source of debate – is H.R. 3200. The bill is a 1,017-page document that proponents say will create a “public option” for health insurance coverage to compete with the private market and will provide coverage to those who are underserved by existing insurance companies. Opponents say, among other complaints, that it will nationalize more of the economy and is a step toward a socialist, single-payer system of health care that is in place in some European countries right now.

Opponents are also voicing worries about personal privacy, end of life counseling and potential funding for abortion in the bill. In short: this issue is partially a debate about where the reach of government should extend and where it should stop.

Those on both sides of the issues have clashed verbally and, at times, physically at public meetings about health care over the past months.

In St. Louis, members of the Service International Employees Union were caught on tape assaulting a local conservative blogger outside a forum being held by Congressman Russ Carnahan, a Democrat who supports the plan to create a government-run health care plan.

All the major cable news channels have regularly aired footage of town hall meetings and other public forums that show everything from people going nose-to-nose in an argument to someone having their signs ripped from their hands by a person who disagrees with what it said to protesters being arrested for inciting or threatening violence.

Activists and otherwise concerned citizens on both sides of the debate obviously take the argument over the federal government’s place in health care both seriously and personally.

Political issues of the day come and go, so what makes this matter of more interest to the public?

 It could be that our health care is something that touches almost every part of our lives: health, family and pocketbook. It is a political issue, an economic issue and personal matter all at the same time.

It is also one of those issues where once you cross the starting line, there is little chance of going back if it fails. Once entitlement benefits are offered it is nearly impossible to repeal them later.

As an example, remember one of the hot political issues of the day from the mid 1990’s up to about 2004: Social Security.  Incumbent politicians, mostly Republicans, often had to play defense against accusations that they wanted to privatize or reduce Social Security benefits to seniors. Social Security was, at the time, rightly called the “Third Rail of Politics” in that he who touched it received a painful political jolt.

Imagine how much more voltage politicians will face in the future if they ever want to “reform” a public health care system with millions of participants, even if that system is – like Social Security – headed for insolvency.

The stakes are unusually high in terms of politics, finances and matters of life and death.

That makes health care reform town hall meetings and other public appearances by the Congressmen and –women who will vote on it the proverbial line of scrimmage.

Despite having large majorities in both chambers of Congress and occupying the White House, Democrats in Washington D.C. are reeling from the amount of opposition to their health care plan. The passion that is serving up that opposition has also forced politicians in both parties to take notice.

Is it public pressure or political theater?

Protesting against government is nothing new, of course. Yet there has been an upswing of rallies and other demonstrations over the past six months. The protest and activism became more public this past April with the Tea Party events all over the United States, including in Lee’s Summit, Kansas City, Kearney and Overland Park. Thousands of people attended local Tea Party events on April 15^th – Tax Day.

The movement grew from there to address more than just taxes. Legislation like the so-called “Cap and Trade” environmental regulations, union card check laws, the government’s bailouts of banking and auto industries and President Obama’s push for government health care have all become topics at Tea Party rallies, web sites and online discussion forums.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi says the current wave of demonstrations against government spending and regulations are not reflective of the public. In a television interview earlier this year, she called protests like the Tea Party rallies “astroturf” and saying “it’s not really a grassroots movement…”

“Astroturf” is a political terms that refers to fake protests or campaigning.

Other accusations from the left claim that Republican, conservative and business interests are organizing and paying people to be “plants” to derail health care legislation. That is a claim that Carl Bearden takes issue with.

Bearden is a former Missouri State Representative and is currently the Missouri Director of Americans for Prosperity, which is active in opposing many of the bills that would increase governmental spending and add regulations to the private sector.

“Accusations of being a GOP-coordinated effort show the desperation of the government run healthcare supporters. The vast majority of [Tea Party] participants don't identify with a party. In fact, some are offended when you try to put a party label on them."

Holding so much power in the halls of government, Bearden continued, is part of the reason that Democrats in particular are facing such vocal opposition to the health care policy proposals. “When you are the party in power, you are the one pushing an agenda through and will rightfully get most of the arrows."

Jacob Turk is the only announced Republican candidate to challenge Missouri Congressman Emanuel Cleaver, who represents the Kansas City area. He has attended a number of rallies and public meetings and says the people are real citizens with real anger; “The hundreds of protesters I have talked with are worried moms and dads, small business owners, the elderly and people of about every other age who have researched the proposals bubbling up in Congress and found many, many provisions that are outright dangerous.”

Turk opposes the President’s health care plan, Cleaver supports it.

Sometimes the anger at those in office extends beyond not liking how they stand on the issue – it comes from the perception that their representatives are not willing to even listen.

That was the case in Overland Park, which is in Kansas’ Third Congressional District, when a town hall meeting on health care was held in late August without the area’s Representative, Democrat Dennis Moore.

Congressman Todd Tiahrt, a Republican from Wichita who is running for the U.S. Senate, hosted his own forum in Moore’s district in August. An estimated 400 – 450 people showed up, most of whom voiced opposition to the idea of government getting more involved in health care.

This time, the protesters were in favor of the H.R. 3200 and government-run health care. Inside the meeting, the audience was at least 90% opposed to the idea. At times, those in the audience seemed just as frustrated with Congressman Moore for declining to hold or appear in public meetings about the health care proposals being debated in the country.

Unlike town hall meetings in St. Louis and a few other places, there was never a time at the Overland Park meeting where violence was a concern, although manners were forgotten at times. Tiahrt tried to set the tone by starting off the meeting with a declaration that both sides would be allowed to speak and he wanted everyone to remain respectful of others.

At one point, a man was asking the Congressman about his personal health insurance and whether he received a government plan while opposing a public plan for Americans (Tiahrt said his family purchases private health insurance). When asking a follow up question the man, who appeared to be in favor of a government insurance plan, was interrupted by someone on the other side of the room.

“Shut up, will you!” the older man bellowed at the speaker “You’ve had your say!”

Tiahrt stepped in right away. “Sir,” the Congressman interjected, “let him have his say. Sit down, please.”

There were no more verbal confrontations throughout the rest of the meeting.

It is likely that the overwhelming agreement in opposition to a government health insurance system kept tensions in check. Still, respect for those in office was not always on display. After a number of questioners from the public voiced their frustration with their own Congressman for not taking part in any events like this, even Tiahrt succumbed to the emotion a little, once referring to his Congressional colleague as “Representative Moron”. He quickly apologized but got a quick, if not uncomfortable, laugh out of some in the audience.

Dr. Mathew Staver, the Dean of the Liberty University School of Law, says he is not ready to condemn those who become emotional or display frustration towards elected officials right now. “There’s a time for rational and reasoned dialog.” Staver explained in an interview for the Kansas City Metro Voice “But when government doesn’t listen to people, it inevitably leads to frustration and that’s what we’re seeing today.”

Congressman Tiahrt agreed and said he does not understand why elected officials would avoid meeting with the public, even after things got physical in St. Louis. “There is a need for people to speak out. I’m not sure why there’s apprehension [by some elected officials]; if you treat people with respect, they will be respectful.

“Some people are trying to stir up emotions on both sides,” Tiahrt continued, “that’s why I try to give people a voice.”

Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill has approached the public discussion the same way overall. Other than some instances of being shouted at, her numerous town hall meetings have had few disturbances and none that were serious or considered threatening.

McCaskill, a Democrat who favors the proposal that includes a public health care plan, has found herself on the opposing side of this issue as most of her audience in some locations, but has given those who disagree with her the opportunity to tell her so in person. 

The Senator’s Press Secretary, Maria Speiser, told the Metro Voice “It’s important that people have an opportunity to let their elected officials know their opinions, and that’s the reason Claire is holding these open forums.  People feel strongly about their health care, so it’s not surprising that so many people are taking advantage of opportunities to express their concerns.  But listening to each other is an important part of the democratic process for everyone involved, so it’s important not to lose sight of that goal too.”

What about matters of faith during times of protest?

Beyond politics, we as Christians still have a responsibility to conduct ourselves properly. According to Dr. Staver, who is also the founder of the Liberty Counsel, biblical principles of respect for government do not have to clash with being active in the political process – even as protesters.

“Ezekiel and John the Baptist” Staver explained “were considered radical and obnoxious at times.”

He said the manner in which we engage public issues depends on the context of the issue and “…the specific calling on which God placed on our hearts.

“We can’t be so passive in the face of government attempts to take over your liberty.”

At the same time, Staver cautions, Christians must also remember that we are Christians first and be careful to consider how our actions and words affect not only others but our outreach. He added that while it is acceptable to be angry about bad public policy, we should “be very concerned about our Christian witness at all times.”

Dr. Staver advises Christians who are involved in political protests to stay active. “Just be careful” he continued “that the messenger doesn’t override the message and ultimately hurt the message.

“We are a reflection of the Lord.”