What if there had been Slavery Reform...like current Health Care Reform?

Imagine it is 1861.  Newly elected Abraham Lincoln is giving a major address to the nation, regarding slavery.  He begins by talking about the injustices of slavery. How it violates not only our sensibilities, but the basic rights of human beings.  He discusses the numerous harms created by the then current system.  He goes to address to the need to do something about it.  He states that "If we were starting a system from scratch, I think that the idea of a society and economic system that is not based upon slavery makes sense.  That's the kind of system that you have in most advanced countries around the world. The only problem is, we're not starting from scratch.  We don't want a huge disruption as we go into reform where suddenly we're trying to completely reinvent one-sixth of the economy....We’ve got all these legacy systems in place, and managing the transition, as well as adjusting the culture to a different system, would be difficult to pull off. So we may need a system that’s not so disruptive that people feel like suddenly what they’ve known for most of their lives is thrown by the wayside."

Lincoln does not have a specific proposal, but rather asks Congress to come up with a solution based upon some key principles:

1. Financial Viability: for both slaves and slaveholders.  Bankruptcy (financial, if not moral) must be prevented.

2. Affordability: for businesses and slaves to continue working and producing, and reduce inefficiency

3. Universality: rules must apply to all slaves and slaveholders.

4. Portability: Providing rules for how slaves transition owners, and making the process easier.  Just because a previous owner may have thought a slave to be disruptive or disobedient, that does not mean the new owner can treat them harshly as a result.

5. Guaranteed Choice: Slaves should be able to choose which job or jobs they perform on plantations (as much as possible).  If they like their current job, they shouldn't be forced to do a different job (without extraordinary reason, and within financial limits).

6. Invest in Prevention: Invest in measures to prevent disputes among slaves and slaveolders from happening in the first place.

7. Improve Safety & Quality Slaving: address bad working conditions, and create way of promoting slaving "best practices."

8. Sustainability: creating a system that can continue well over time.

Now, understand that the pro-slavery lobby is very strong.  There is opposition on Congress to radical proposals, and advocacy for incremental approaches.  Abolitionist groups, who supported Lincoln's election a the basis that he advocated strong change, continue to support him despite the fact that he is abandoning real reform (which he really only vaguely promised in the first place, despite their belief in the contrary).  Therefore, they encourage Congress to take strong action on the principles.  The slim Congressional majority cobbles together a controversial plan that proposes several measures.  While it does leave the current slavery system in place, new rules are intended to help insure better working conditions for the slaves.  Slave mothers would be allowed to choose whether or not they want to keep their newborns with them -- in which the children would then become slaves -- or else give them away to families in the north who would raise them in freedom.  A system would be set up whereby slaves could save up to eventually buy their freedom.  Slaves would have some input into what chores they had to do.  Slavemasters could only whip slaves under certain specific circumstances, and under threat of arbitration in which they would have to pay a small penalty if found in violation.  They could also only take slave women into their beds if they themselves as well as the slave were unmarried.

This sounds crazy, of course.  The logical and just path would be to end slavery.  Anything else seems ludicrous to even contemplate.  Why cite eight principles when one will do: a real and acknowledged right to freedom from slavery.  So the above scenario would never have happened.  In fact, nothing like that would ever realistically be allowed to happen. 

You may think so.  But nevertheless it is happening right now.  It is happening in our current health care reform debate, in what has been proposed by Obama and Congress.

Do you doubt this?  The hypothetical Lincoln quote above is drawn almost word for word from a statement by Obama on why he feels a single-payer guaranteed health care for all type system would be good, but only if they were "starting from scratch.*  (After all, such a system is based upon proven ideas that work better than our "system" in all aspects).  The principles of reform are similarly sourced.**

Plenty of similar analogies can be made to other historic struggles in the U.S.

Just imagine if:

* Martin Luther King, Jr. acknowledged that civil rights make sense, but only if they were starting from scratch, and that complete freedom for blacks in American would be too disruptive to the existing system.  Therefore, instead he advocates for a couple extra rows at the back of the bus.  And for blacks to be able to eat at lunch counters, though in special designated areas, and only only between 2 and 3 o'clock, and not on Tuesdays because that's when local KKK grand dragons like to come in to eat.  And that literacy tests for voting are alright, as long as we make the questions a little easier.

* Alice Paul and suffragists acknowledged that giving women the right to vote makes sense, but only if they were starting from scratch, and to advocate for complete women's suffrage would be too disruptive to the existing system.  Therefore, she concedes to a conditional right to vote: women be allowed to vote with the understanding that they would be required to vote the same as their husbands (or fathers).  And only in off-off-year elections.  And only in uncontested races.

* John Adams and other American colonial leaders acknowledged that requiring that the colonists have a democratic say in laws governing them makes sense, but only if they were starting from scratch, and to advocate for complete representation would be too disruptive to the existing system.  Therefore, him and others concede taxation without representation, but advocate for lower rates.

* The peace movement acknowledged that ending the Vietnam War makes sense, but only if they were starting from scratch, and to advocate for an end the war that already started would be too disruptive to the existing situation.  Therefore, they ask that that the US military use 500 lb. bombs instead of the 1000 lb. variety when carpets bombing heavy civilian areas in the North, that Vietnamese be warned before the debilitating chemical defoliant Agent Orange is dumped on the countryside, and that wealthy and well-connected draft-age Americans actually have to cough up an official fee in order to secure their deferments.

* Rachel Carson and environmentalists acknowledged that ending the use of the poisonous pesticide DDT makes makes sense, but only if they were starting from scratch, and to advocate for a complete ban would be too disruptive to the existing system.  Therefore, they concede to it's continued use, as long as the containers that it is transported in are recyclable. 

* Child labor reform activists acknowledged that ending unjust child labor practices in sweatshops makes sense, but only if they were starting from scratch, and to advocate for a complete ban would be too disruptive to the existing economy.  Therefore, they concede that 8 year olds can continue to work long hours in hazardous conditions, but advocate that industry be required to pay an extra penny per hour, and 2 cents on holidays, and that the kids be allowed to use the bathroom twice a shift instead of just once.

To imagine any of these things is to conceive of an American very different from the one we have known, one that would be hardly recognizable, if such a creature could even be considered to be anything related to the American nation which we have created.

Unfortunately, the current health care reform situation is unfolding in such a way that departs similarly from the progressive legacy of the past in this country.

This is due largely to the fact that the current administration and Congress is a political courage-free zone.  And a real leadership free zone.  And a principle-zone free (at least, free of any honorable principles).  A government which is truly that the best that money (in terms of campaign contributions) can buy.

I don't know which is worse: the Republicans who want little real change, but who at least virtually acknowledge being led by the insurance companies.  Or the Democrats, who while the claim they do want some reform and demonize the insurance companies in word, but don't acknowledge that they are still beholden to them and don't really want to bite the the hands that feed their reelection prospects.

It is clear that the current "reform" efforts are political calculated, and not based on any concept of true reform.  One indication of this is the aforementioned "we're not starting from scratch" mantra (of the Democrats).  Another is their open desperation to pass "something, anything" for fear of losing seats in Congress next time around.  Another is the fact that possible reforms wouldn't be scheduled to kick in for years, ensuring that the results of their (mis)steps are years away and disconnected from their present actions, at the expense of years of suffering by Americans under the existing "system."

This current rights struggle -- to establish a genuine right to health care -- is one of THE pivotal and defining political struggles of our era.  Such a right can only be established in actuality by replacing our current ridiculous "system" -- one which costs too much, covers too little, excludes too many, and is getting worse -- with one that will actually solve the problem: a single-payer guaranteed health care for all.  We must demand real reform, guided by political courage and not expendiency, based on leadership and not political calculation, and founded on rights rather than legalized bribery.

To accept anything less is to give in to selfish monied interests who exercise their power at the expense of the rightful rulers of this country: the people.  It is to allow problems to continue.  It is to accept injustice.  It is to fail as a country, as a society, and as individuals.  And it would be to accept the demise of this nation, in spirit (and inevitably, eventually, in its very existence).

We must not, we cannot, allow that to happen.

* President Barack Obama: "If I were starting a system from scratch then I think that the idea of moving toward a single-payer system could very well make sense.  That's the kind of system that you have in most industrialized countries around the world.  The only problem is that we're not starting from scratch.  We have historically a tradition of employer-based healthcare.  And, although there are a lot of people who are not satisfied with their health care, the truth is that the vast majority of people currently get health care from their employers, and you've got this system that's already in place....We don't want a huge disruption as we go into healthcare reform where suddenly we're trying to completely re-invent one-sixth of the economy.

If you’re starting from scratch,’ he [Obama] says, ‘then a single-payer system’-a government-managed system like Canada’s, which disconnects health insurance from employment-’would probably make sense. But we’ve got all these legacy systems in place, and managing the transition, as well as adjusting the culture to a different system, would be difficult to pull off. So we may need a system that’s not so disruptive that people feel like suddenly what they’ve known for most of their lives is thrown by the wayside.’

** Obama's 8 Principles of Health Care Reform:
1. Protect Families’ Financial Health. The plan must reduce the growing premiums and other costs American citizens and businesses pay for health care. People must be protected from bankruptcy due to catastrophic illness.
2. Make Health Coverage Affordable. The plan must reduce high administrative costs, unnecessary tests and services, waste, and other inefficiencies that consume money with no added health benefits.
3. Aim for Universality. The plan must put the United States on a clear path to cover all Americans.
4. Provide Portability of Coverage. People should not be locked into their job just to secure health coverage, and no American should be denied coverage because of preexisting conditions.
5.Guarantee Choice. The plan should provide Americans a choice of health plans and physicians. They should have the option of keeping their employer-based health plan.
6. Invest in Prevention and Wellness. The plan must invest in public health measures proven to reduce cost drivers in our system—such as obesity, sedentary lifestyles, and smoking — as well as guarantee access to proven preventive treatments.
7. Improve Patient Safety and Quality Care. The plan must ensure the implementation of proven patient safety measures and provide incentives for changes in the delivery system to reduce unnecessary variability in patient care. It must support the widespread use of health information technology and the development of data on the effectiveness of medical interventions to improve the quality of care delivered.
8. Maintain Long-Term Fiscal Sustainability. The plan must pay for itself by reducing the level of cost growth, improving productivity, and dedicating additional sources of revenue.