Janet D. Stemwedel (whose nom de blog is Dr. Free-Ride) is an associate professor of philosophy at San Jose State University. Before becoming a philosopher, she earned a Ph.D. in physical chemistry. Email her at dr.freeride@gmail.com.
The better half and I were trying to decide this morning whether there was a way to follow the progress of "health care reform" in the U.S. Senate without getting really mad or really sad. (Conclusion: It seems logically possible that such a way exists, but we haven't found it yet.)
The one player that seems likely to get much of what it wants in all this seems to be the insurance industry. Given that the folks working out who gets what are politicians, this does not surprise me.
So it occurred to me that maybe we shouldn't be trusting politicians to achieve health care reform.
Instead maybe we need to mobilize a generation of new college graduates to get jobs with the health insurance industry and take 'em down from the inside.
Surely our young people are up to the challenge!
Politics
Comments
The better half and I were trying to decide this morning whether there was a way to follow the progress of "health care reform" in the U.S. Senate without getting really mad or really sad.
I have been wrestling with this for days. Earlier, I was enough into the process that I could easily handle it emotionally. Now, it is like watching someone die.
Your method is something we should do, but that will take about 15 years and while we should do what you suggest, we need something more immediate!
Also, how does one deal with the disconnect between the popular movement against health care and the insurance industry. I know the latter have arranged for and funded the former, but the teabaggers are for real, and are not going away soon.
Posted by: n.w. | December 18, 2009 10:47 PM
Indeed, that's a tried-and-true method. Consider, for instance, how the idealistic Boomers of the 60s went on to reform business and politics.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | December 19, 2009 7:38 AM
When I was a youngster, maybe around 1948, I was reading a LOOK magazine. There was an article about the twelve richest men in America. Eight of the twelve made all or part of their fortunes in insurance. So we have a long established, proficient, and successful opponent.
One thing which is different today, compared to 1948, is that the majority of college graduates are female. This has been true since the mid 1980's. It is true today, or soon will be, that the majority of degreed people in the USA will be female. How is this going to change the landscape?
Posted by: Jim Thomerson | December 19, 2009 12:13 PM
Are you hoping that a University education makes more of a difference to women than men in terms of resisting PR manipulation?
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | December 20, 2009 7:18 AM
Perhaps if we were to organize large busloads of people who need medical attention and do large scale trips to Mexico and Canada where it is more affordable to seek treatment...
Nah, I'm sure the press would just ignore such things.
It is too bad that we can't tell the intent of politicians by their words during the election cycle. It could be useful to disallow campaign contributions and lobbying efforts from corporate interests. Other than that I just don't know.
Posted by: DJ | December 20, 2009 10:26 AM