The President's Health Care Speech: The Morning After
Long-time CG&G visitors know that my day job is a partner at a national public relations agency based in Washington. Today I'm posting in that capacity.
Communications-wise, the president needed to do one basic thing last night: provide congressional Democrats with the testicular fortitude to keep moving ahead with health care reform.
There were only two target audiences: House and Senate Dems and their constituents. GOP members were largely irrelevant.
And there were two primary tasks: force the other side to start responding to what health care proponents were saying rather than initiating the conversation, and debunk some of what the White House said were myths about health care reform.
In these communications terms, the speech completely succeeded. Although polls taken immediately after an event are not always the best measure, the CNN poll showed a substantial gain for the president's position among those who watched the speech. The increase likely was far more than the White House expected and definitely enough to be comforting to Democrats. And the instant CNN results were validated by a Democracy Corps poll.
(Note: CNN says that its survey included more Democrats than Republicans and that skews the results somewhat. In this case, however, a great result from a poll of Dems is what the White House needed given the target audience.)
The key will be the next 96 hours. Bill Clinton made a similar speech on health care that rallied the troops for a few days before the shine wore off, so we should all watch to see the results of polls taken over the weekend and reported next Monday. Also watch what the White House does to intensify the instant results from last night. Are there follow-up rallies around the country? Who appears on the Sunday talk shows, what do they say, and how is it perceived? Most important...do one or more previously undeclared high-impact Senate members and other influentials announce their support for health care reform and, therefore, show continued momentum towards the president?
One final note: Rep. Joe Wilson (R-SC) shouting out during the speech that the president was lying may very well be a turning point in the health care debate. It may not hurt Wilson at home, but it likely emboldened some Senate Democrats in ways that the president could not have done on his own. Wilson was doing the health care reform equivalent of "hiking the Apalachian Trail."
The Speech
Fair enough on the PR side, but how plausible is the President's assertion this won't add to the deficit, keeping in mind the expenditure (now) rosy projections made when Medicare and Medicaid were enacted, and ignoring the various accounting misdirections Presidents (think Bush the Younger in recent years) and Congresses use to mask the red ink?
Generally, I learn a lot from
Generally, I learn a lot from your posts. However, comments like this are deeply disappointing:
"Communications-wise, the president needed to do one basic thing last night: provide congressional Democrats with the testicular fortitude to keep moving ahead with health care reform"
You can't be unaware that there are important female congressional Democrats -- like Nancy Pelosi! Yet, there is no way "testicular fortitude" applies to women; thus, this comment subtly, but surely, underscores the idea that congress is a place for men. Is that really necessary? If a female Speaker of the House is not enough to remind people, and especially informed, smart people like you, that Congress is a place for men AND women, what is? Very depressing...
Whoops
So much for relating to 50% of the public.
Nod to Tort Reform
This was an interesting part of the speech. Obama actually said he is open to tort reform, one of the key points for cost savings which is repeatedly hammered by the Republicans.
This was a brilliant move, because tort reform MUST be accompanied by healthcare reform . . . you can't limit a judgement to a person who was damaged by the healthcare or pharma industry, and then charge them up the ying yang for insurance for the rest of their lives (because, in many cases, they now have a pre-existing condition). That doesn't work, unless you are a heartless bastard Republican being paid off by the insurance and pharma industries.
I know someone in this situation, and their options are to a) sue the pharma company that gave them a drug which caused damage (and this cause is openly admitted by all the doctors consulted and now the FDA), or b) hope that Obama's reform protects them (ie., guarantees affordable coverage and treatment) for the rest of their life.
This individual doesn't want to sue, but the present system forces them to get a settlement that provides enough money to pay for insurance at the highest rates, until they hit Medicare age (65).
Tort reform MUST go hand-in-hand with the other reforms (public option, guaranteed coverage for pre-existing conditions, removal of "lifetime max" caps, sliding scale premiums based on income).
President Obama’s heath care
President Obama’s heath care promises won’t be kept. Costs will rise exponentially, NOT fall. Therefore, our taxes will be the ones to pay for it. We need to support the goal of covering all individuals through private health insurance. We are NOT prepared to turn our health system over to the government.
http://www.friendsoftheuschamber.com/issues/index.cfm?ID=300 .