September 13 March for Health Care - Can Liberals Succeed Without Corporate Sponsorship?

The right wing has a lot going for it in terms of easy sources for support. In addition to a bunch of hate mongers on talk radio, the right wing has the vast Rupert Murdoch News Corp media empire to aggressively push and coordinate opposition to progressive legislation. Moreover, as noted in the story below, the right wing has limitless access to corporate sponsored and organized astroturf (false grassroots) resources. Finally, the right wing is unconstrained by the truth. They are simply trying to use smear and fear to stop reform, rather than trying to actually debate the merits of the legislation. If nothing happens, they win, so momentum and inertia are on their side.

So, at last, there are calls for a single day to demonstrate and march in support of health care reform. Without millions of dollars in corporate sponsorship and organization, and free media coverage by Fox News, there has not been a real coordinated effort to demonstrate and the demonstrations that have occurred in favor of reform are routinely ignored by the media. The question is whether such efforts can succeed without corporate sponsorship?

Looking at this article by the Seattle Times, the degree to which corporate interests are funding the opposition to health care reform is quite amazing. Maybe liberals can compete by selling logo space like NASCAR?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2009674856_healthlobby17.html

###

Who's behind the fight against health-care change
Much of the money and strategy behind the so-called grass-roots groups organizing opposition to the Democrats' health-care plans comes from conservative political consultants, professional organizers and millionaires, some of whom hold financial stakes in the outcome.

By Margaret Talev

McClatchy Newspapers

Much of the money and strategy behind the so-called grass-roots groups organizing opposition to the Democrats' health-care plans comes from conservative political consultants, professional organizers and millionaires, some of whom hold financial stakes in the outcome.

If President Obama and Congress extend health-insurance coverage to millions of uninsured Americans, raise taxes on the wealthy to pay for it, and limit insurers' discretion on whom they cover and what they charge, that could pinch these opponents.

Most of them say they oppose big government in principle. Despite Obama's assurances to the contrary, many of them insist the Democrats' legislation is but the first step toward creation of a single-payer system where the federal government hires the doctors, approves treatments, sets the rules and imperils profit.

These opposition groups appear to have spent at least $10 million so far on ads attacking the Democrats' plans. Still, supporters of a health-care overhaul have outspent opponents by about 2-to-1 so far, according to Evan Tracey of the Campaign Media Analysis Group, which tracks ad spending. Supporters include drugmakers angling for their own protections, unions, the American Medical Association and AARP, the seniors lobby. Supporters announced this week that they intend to spend $150 million promoting an overhaul.

The opposition groups' names sound catchy and populist: Patients First. Patients United. Americans for Prosperity. Conservatives for Patients' Rights. FreedomWorks. 60 Plus. Club for Growth.

Here's who's behind them:

Conservatives for Patients' Rights is led by health-care entrepreneur Rick Scott, the co-founder of Solantic urgent-care walk-in centers, which he's spread across Florida and is looking to expand. While 80 percent of its patients have at least some insurance, Solantic also bills itself as an alternative to emergency-room care and a resource for patients with no insurance.

Scott left his job as CEO of the Columbia/HCA hospitals during a federal Medicare-fraud probe in 1997 that led to a historic $1.7 billion settlement. He wasn't prosecuted and got a golden parachute.

Solantic's growth, Scott said in a telephone interview, is, in part, because of the trend in which "deductibles and co-payments are going up. As that happens, more people want us."

Scott said he wasn't concerned that the Democrats' proposed revisions would undercut his business: "It's irrelevant to us." Instead, he said he opposes the Democrats' plans because he doesn't believe that government involvement will contain health-care costs. He sees it killing off the best private-insurance plans and ultimately leading to a single-payer system, which he predicted would lead to waiting lists and denial of treatments.

Scott said he supports some government intervention — such as preventing insurers from dumping sick patients. Those who can't afford coverage on their own should get vouchers or tax credits, he said.

FreedomWorks, which has been advocating against the overhaul but has not launched TV ads, is chaired by Dick Armey, the former Republican majority leader of the House of Representatives from Texas. Armey on Friday quit his job with the lobbying firm DLA Piper amid complaints from the firm's drug company clients about his work opposing the health care overhaul.

The drug companies who helped defeat the Clinton administration health care effort 15 years ago but have made a deal with the Obama administration to limit their share of the costs, have turned on Armey who then was one of their most important congressional allies.

But also noteworthy are the group's other backers and board members. They include billionaire flat-tax proponent and former GOP presidential candidate Steve Forbes; Richard Stephenson, who founded Cancer Treatment Centers of America, which offers alternative as well as standard therapies, sometimes not covered by insurance; and Frank Sands Sr., CEO of an investment-management firm whose offerings include a Healthcare Leaders portfolio.

"They're on our board because they support lower taxes, less government and more freedom," said FreedomWorks spokesman Adam Brandon.

Matt Kibbe, the chief executive officer of FreedomWorks, said its members believe "the government is already way too involved in the nation's health-care system" and government is to blame for health-cost inflation.

Kibbe acknowledged private insurance is out of reach for many small businesses and individuals, but he contended that can be dealt with without creating a government-managed exchange. Like Scott, he expressed concern that more government interference would lead to a single-payer system, which he said would "inevitably" impose rationing of treatments to contain costs.

Patients First and Patients United are creations of a larger group called Americans for Prosperity. AFP's Web site describes a grass-roots organization with more than 700,000 members that advocates "for public policies that champion the principles of entrepreneurship and fiscal and regulatory restraint."

It was started by billionaire David Koch, of the Koch Industries oil family, one of the country's top donors to conservative, free-market causes. The foundation's board includes Art Pope, a former North Carolina legislator also involved in conservative causes, whose family owns hundreds of discount stores.

Tim Phillips, AFP's president, is a former Republican congressional staffer who helped former Christian Coalition Executive Director Ralph Reed start up the consulting firm Century Strategies in the 1990s. Clients paid the firm to build Christian grass-roots support for various business causes. That included work for since-convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

The group, along with FreedomWorks, was involved in promoting the anti-tax "tea parties" earlier this year. AFP also is organizing a campaign "exposing the ballooning costs of global warming hysteria."

In an interview, AFP's Phillips said that he couldn't think of anyone on his board with a direct financial stake in the health-care industry. "It's more freedom-based," he said. "They have a deep interest in protecting economic freedoms."

He also said that no one in his organization believes more government involvement in health care will lead to reduced costs for taxpayers. By Labor Day, he said, his group will have organized 600 rallies on health care.

"Americans are looking at these rallies that are happening and the town-hall turnouts, and they say, 'No one group out of thin air could do that,' " Phillips said. "The American people can see through the attacks on the other side, where they try to vilify these groups as being corporate groups or front groups. They're believing it is, in fact, a broad groundswell.

"We're out here saying the truth, which is costs are going to go up and quality is going to go down. And what's the other side saying? 'Oh, these are front groups, these are all rich people.' "

Two other grass-roots groups have financed ads targeting fears that more government involvement would hurt seniors and hasten end-of-life decisions.

One of them, Club for Growth, which advocates lower taxes, is led by President Chris Chocola, a former Republican congressman from Indiana who lost his re-election bid in 2006. Club for Growth this week announced a $1.2 million ad campaign against a health-care overhaul, to run in North Dakota, Colorado, Arkansas and Nevada.

The other, 60 Plus Association, is a conservative senior-advocacy group that wants to abolish the estate tax. Singer Pat Boone is the group's national spokesman. Chairman Jim Martin started the group in 1992 with fundraising help from conservative direct-mail guru Richard Viguerie. It spent $1.5 million on TV ads opposing a health-care overhaul in the last week.

###

Sorry - wrong thread.