Town Hall meeting with Frank Lucas

[Editor's note:   This is an essay.  It contains not only facts but also some of my personal views.]

Representative Frank Lucas was in Watonga on Thursday afternoon, preaching to his choir.  Less than twenty people (I counted fourteen) showed up and Mr. Lucas basically told his constituents what they wanted to hear:  that Obamacare (the Affordable Care Act) is bad, that the Senate isn't helping matters, and that nothing is going to be done in Washington for the next couple of years except for possibly the passing of “his” Farm Bill.  

He did acknowledge that government is being strangled by (1) campaign finance reform that allowed contributions to political campaigns to go to PAC's, taking control of those funds out of the hands of the political parties with a wide platform and putting control into small groups with specific agendas; (2) the Supreme Court decision that allows corporations to be treated as individuals with regard to contributions to political campaigns (which means that the wealthy, individuals or businesses or unions, can basically push their agenda through with the size of their check); and (3) the public's general attitude of disgust with politicians.

One problem with our government is money in the political system; the other is that Congressmen are no longer statesmen but are strictly politicians.  Our government representatives seem to have lost the knack of working together toward a goal.  

Now that it is apparent that the Affordable Care Act is going to be the law of the land (in spite of all of the time and effort spent –in vain - to repeal it or modify it after the fact) the only thing Mr. Lucas seems to be interested in is pushing forward his Farm Bill.   It's a complicated matter and there are definitely many layers to the issue, but as long as the public keeps their heads turned toward one side of the fence and doesn't look at the other side, politicians like Frank Lucas will be able to use their speaking skills to convince their followers  that there is only one side to the issue. Except for a few intelligent comments and questions from the audience, the town hall meeting was like a  preacher giving a sermon to a group of true believers, with every derogatory word and phrase about President Obama and the current administration being responded to with an "Amen".

As for Obamacare (a derogatory term referring to the Affordable Care Act), which Mr. Lucas believes is bad for the country because it will be subsidized by federal spending, most of his gerrymandered constituents really don't know the details of what the law actually entails.  They only know what they've been told in unfavorable terms by politicians, news pundits, and talking heads who are against it.  If anyone would bother to listen to anything other than FOX entertainment, they might be able to see a positive side to Obamacare.  Talk to someone who will now be able to get health insurance coverage, or someone who will now be able to go to see a doctor without fear of getting a bill they cannot pay. 

The truth is that the Affordable Care Act will benefit MILLIONS of people, including YOUNG ADULTS, THE ELDERLY, THE UNEMPLOYED, PART-TIME EMPLOYEES, THE SELF-EMPLOYED, AND SOME DOCTORS AND HOSPITALS!  How?  Here's just one example:  Every person needs health care at some point in their lives.  Currently,  hospitals write-off possibly millions of dollars in medical care costs which they are unable to collect from the uninsured, the poor, the elderly, young adults who don't make enough to either pay for insurance or pay for their medical expenses. Under the ACA more of those costs will now be paid. The  less money the hospitals have to write-off, the less they will have to raise fees for medical care to make up for the write-offs.  Granted, insurance companies will probably raise their premium rates because that is the business they are in -- profit, profit, profit--not a touch of "compassionate conservatism" in their corporate bones.   The only involved industries that don't get a direct benefit from the ACA are insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies ....corporate entities that help keep politicians in office with their millions of dollars in campaign contributions. There are too many other benefits that the public will see in the future to list here, but anyone with an open mind can find some good in the new law and how it will help ordinary Americans.  No, it’s not the perfect answer, but a “perfect answer” has not been proposed by anyone; even if it were, someone would object.  We have to compromise and see what happens, and I personally don't see what use it is to bad-mouth the law at this point except to make the public more devisive (and disgusted with politicians).  Let's move on.  

Years ago (early 1980’s?) when HMO’s came onto the market, most everyone whined and complained about it.  But the system had it’s good side, and I for one am glad I had HMO coverage when my son was born premature and had to stay in the hospital for six weeks in NICU . I didn’t have to declare bankruptcy after giving birth to a child who needed special medical care and an extended stay in the hospital.  Yes, the doctor who delivered him was one “on call” and not the doctor I had seen two days earlier for a prenatal check, but in the moments between life and death, it didn’t matter who the insurance company was going to pay for the delivery.  As years went by, more and more people saw the benefits of the HMO system  and then the PPO system, one of which was cost savings to the consumer.  [My son is now a healthy 28 year old, not covered under his parents health insurance and cannot afford his own health insurance coverage.  Even with good health, he still needs to see a doctor once a year and has to pay for it out-of-pocket. ACA will at the minimum allow him to get affordable health insurance coverage.]  

Anyway, Mr. Lucas seems to have lost sight of the fact that his congressional district covers a large group who live below the poverty line or are disabled or unemployed, and the Affordable Care Act (he couldn't even use the correct term while speaking to the group; when corrected, he tried to call it mandated healthcare) will benefit a large number of his constituents.  These are not just people who are lazy and don’t want to work and don’t want to pay for health insurance or pay their medical bills.   But  Mr. Lucas is working for individuals and businesses who don't really have to worry about the everyday issues of putting food on the table or going to the doctor. He works for businesses and individuals with money and doesn't see why those that "have"  should contribute to provide health insurance or health care for those who cannot afford it. 

Ironically, in the long run they pay for it anyway!  

The most interesting  thing I heard Mr. Lucas say was that he and his staff are going to give up their health insurance through the federal government and sign up with the DC health coverage exchange (as soon as he can get on-line and get signed up--another jab at the administration).
What a good citizen, you might say,  giving "one for the gipper".  My question - why?  I asked, Why would you all give up your good insurance to go into the exchange that you all complain is so bad?  Well, it happens that the law contains a provision that says congressmen and their staff must get coverage through the exchange.  So, he isn't doing it voluntarily, but is being required to do so.   As for Congressmen continuing to be paid during the sequestration or the government "shut-down", Mr. Lucas explained that there was a provision US Constitution that prevented congress from being unpaid and Mr. Lucas made a reference to it being a result of King George's relationship with the English Parliament  [anyone want to look that up?  I did, and I contacted an expert on the Constitution. Like much of what politicians tell us, a half-truth.... ?]

There is so much that the public doesn't understand about the Affordable Care Act, and most of what is spread around on the internet and social media is either half-truths, flat-out lies, or statements made that skew the facts.  Yes, the Act does help those who cannot afford to pay for health insurance (or healthcare itself!) and since the private sector doesn’t work to make health care affordable, the government has to step in.  That is what government is for – to help those who CANNOT help themselves.  Unfortunately there are a lot of people who WILL NOT help themselves who get caught in that net. 

The current health insurance plans that people are complaining about having to drop are plans that do not meet the requirements under the ACA.  More about that later …

Thanks for reading.  

"Young cat, if you keep your eyes open enough, oh, the stuff you would learn! The most wonderful stuff!"  the beloved Dr. Seuss