The debate for health care reform is raging. It is not a new debate and is not one that is easily solved. Theodore Roosevelt first introduced the health care reform in 1912 and Kennedy also tried to argue for universal health care in the 1960’s. Why has it taken the United States so long to finally have an active reform on this issue? And what is being done about it? Saul Alinsky in his book Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals lays down tactics that would help pave the road for true reform for once to occur in the health care industry. By applying detailed critical thinking and utilizing the idea of “What would Alinsky do?” the question is raised of how can Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals be applied to the current debate? Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals is not soft. It is not a simple solution to problems. It does not ask for clean-cut, nice-guy tactics to initiate reform. Alinsky instead calls in his thirteen rules for radicals the need to pick the targets and to openly ridicule them. Some of these thirteen rules are analyzed below in context of how they are being used and how they could be used more effectively by the current Obama administration.
Why should we care?
Everyone has a right to health care. The right to health care is an extension of life, of what it is to be human. To deny health care to anyone based on income, health status, gender, or age is entirely unethical. Opponents of the reform are opposed to a government-run insurance plan, known as the public option, for a variety of reasons, including concerns of an increase in deficit, decrease of medical innovation, and fear that health care will result in lower quality care. But taken down to brass tacks, opponents believe that health care is not a right of the people. Health care is not seen as an extension of life, but rather as a privilege. Opponents see the public option as a threat to capitalism, as with this reform the United States health care would no longer be privately run, but rather become a socialized health care. Hint at the word socialism in the United States and the conservative right will do one of two things: run for cover or issue a war. The Alinskian bracelet of WWAD (What would Alinsky do) would say “terrific”! The plan, then, is to ridicule those who are waging the opposition and in doing so expose those that ran for cover. Or as Alinsky put it himself, “… as you zero in and freeze your target and carry out your attack, all the of the ‘others’ come out of the woodwork very soon. They become visible by their support of the target” (Alinsky, 1989, p. 133).
Have health care opponents discovered Alinsky?
The debate on health care has been raging since Obama took office in November. Every day reports that the plan is falling apart hit the news and everyday the White House denies these claims, insisting that these reports are right-wing conservative fear tactics to convince the public that the plan is failing. The thought of a socialist health care system threatens the right’s love affair with capitalism. Once faced with the idea that the health care system might actually succeed, the right has reacted in a rather Alinsky-like fashion: with ridicule. The opponent’s prime target: Barack Obama. Through raucous town hall meeting interruptions, “tea parties,” and the use of propaganda, the conservatives have ridiculed the health care reform and Obama. It would seem that the right has gotten a hold of Alinsky’s book and used it against the left and most particularly against health care reform. And what is the left doing to respond? Are health care reform supporters using Alinsky’s model as well? Are they using it well enough? The answer, though the opponents may not think so, is a resounding yes. First of all, it must be taken into consideration that those who are organizing Alinsky-esque organizations like the tea parties are not doing so in order to affect change; rather, they are doing so in response to those wishing to affect change (in this case, health care reform supporters). The “tea baggers’” attempts at organization and guerilla tactics are not true fighting tactics but are instead simply lashing-out reactions. The status quo on health care has been attacked by the Obama administration and the conservatives are playing right into their hands. Saul Alinsky would say that the trick is to make the enemy think he has power, when in fact, he is losing a fighting battle. This is a slight reverse of what Alinsky means by “power is not what you have but what the enemy thinks you have” (Alinsky, 1989, p. 127). Here, the enemy thinks that health care reform is failing and weakened when in fact, it is stronger than ever. A recent article published in the Washington Post emulates this very idea.
Then there is the interminable health care debate. It seems that the Republican babble may have backfired. According to a poll released last week by the Pew Research Center, most American think that the health care debate has been “rude and disrespectful” and most of those who hold this view blame the opponents of the proposed legislation. According to a Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll published on Wednesday, a plurality of respondents said that if health care reform fails, the Republicans will be at fault… Maybe Obama was wise to hang back. While anger can simmer forever, overheated outrage is exhausting and ultimately counterproductive (Blow, 2009, para. 6).
Real Action
Find your opponent, ridicule him, make him play by the rules of his own book, and most importantly get him to react. Alinsky writes, “the real action is the enemy’s reaction” (Alinsky, 1989, p. 138). And the reaction of health care opponents in these recent weeks has been loud and clear. First of all, take into account the recent outburst of Representative Joe Wilson (R-SC). During Obama’s address on health care reform, Rep. Wilson shouted, “You lie!” after Obama’s comment about illegal immigrants not being covered under the public option plan. Afterwards Wilson issued an apology in which he stated,
This evening I let my emotions get the best of me when listening to the President’s remarks regarding the coverage of illegal immigrants in the health care bill. While I disagree with the President’s statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable. I extend sincere apologies to the President for this lack of civility (Hulse, 2009, para. 14).
Boom. Bam. Caught ‘em. Alinsky would be proud. Wilson’s “emotions getting the better of him” signifies that his side is being pushed enough to spontaneously react. As mentioned above, the already infamous “tea parties” are now backfiring on the Republicans through their use of racist images of Barack Obama, some of which portray him as an African witch doctor. The anger, hate, and racism of the “tea baggers” are being exposed. These are the reactions that promote success for the reformers. Get in underneath the nail beds of your opponents, provoke, persuade, and come out on top until they start to react and by reacting make fools of themselves. Rep Joe Wilson is only one of many that is getting emotionally on-edge as the reform bill comes closer to success.
W.W.A.D. (What Would Alinsky Do?)
What would Alinsky do now?
For one, Alinsky would encourage groups to find the target, to call them out, and hold them accountable. The white house in the Obama administration has not been big on whistle-blowing, as Obama has not made any statements in terms of whom exactly the enemy is. However, in Obama’s recent speech on health care he did state that he would “call out” those that spread lies about health care reform and the public option.
But know this: I will not waste time with those who have made the calculation that it’s better politics to kill this plan than to improve it. (Applause.) I won’t stand by while the special interests use the same old tactics to keep things exactly the way they are. If you misrepresent what’s in this plan, we will call you out. (Applause.) And I will not — and I will not accept the status quo as a solution. Not this time. Not now. (Obama, 2009).
Here, Obama is using Alinsky’s fourth rule of “make the enemy live up to their own book of rules”(Alinsky, 1989, p. 128). Furthermore, not only does Obama hold politicians to their word, but also claims that he will make the insurance companies “accountable” as well (Obama, 2009). Alinsky would definitely push finding out the insurance company heads and holding them accountable. Obama often mentions the enemy being fans of the status quo, insurance companies, right-wing conservative politicians, but he has yet to name names. However, thanks to groups like Health Care for America Now (HCAN) and Sick for Profit, the public can go online and find out exactly who these targets, watch video campaigns launched against them, and see various fraud and corruption charges that have been made against the various companies. Cigna, Aetna, Blue Cross Blue Shield, and United Health Care are only a few of the corporations that are being targeted.
Could there be even more Alinsky-like tactics involved in the health care reform? Alinsky commends to “parade it [the cause] visible, show your power” (Alinsky, 1989, p. 127). Visibility is key to proving a point. For example, the statistics are already known: roughly 46 million people are uninsured in the United States. How can that fact, that overwhelming number, become visible to the public eye? There are a variety of tactics Alinsky might recommend. Perhaps Washington could launch an official candlelight vigil for those that have fallen ill or those that have died due to lack of health care insurance. A list of these names can be read aloud. People can bring their claim denials and place them at the opponent’s doorstep. Insurance industry giants should be pushed and ridiculed to the point of making them take serous action. This echoes the tenth rule: “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition” (Alinsky, 1989, p. 129). Alinsky makes no apologies. It is not some pressure, or a lot of pressure here and not so much there, it is constant, unwavering pressure. Alinsky urges to every day do something else to edge the opponent further to the cliff. Make them react, make them yell, make them upset, until cave in or until they make a public spectacle of themselves, and thereby lose respect. Imagine a table full of sneezing, wheezing, bleeding people at a top-notch restaurant where Mr. Edward Hanway, the CEO of Cigna, dines with lobbyists, politicians, and his top-notch salesmen. This is within their legal right to sit at a table; no one can be thrown out for sneezing – and not just some people, but a lot of people. Every table should be full of sick people, as often as the target can be located. Make it public, make it known, and make it annoying.
Alinsky would also most likely stay on track and target whomever and whatever is appropriate at the time. According to HCAN, the reform bill is in step three of the necessary “Steps to Win” phase, which is “Committees Pass Legislation” (Health Care for America Now, 2009). In step three, HCAN urges everyone to participate with “phone calls, office visits, faxes, emails, and demonstrations” to members of Congress to push them to vote for health care reform and to discourage them from making concessions that are not parallel with Obama’s and HCAN’s vision (Health Care for America Now, 2009). Alinsky would be proud of HCAN for their relentlessness in achieving what they want. Alinsky quote here about “The only thing you get is what you are strong enough to get. (Orenstein & Hercules, 2000). ”
References
Alinsky, S.D. (1989). Rules for Radicals: A Practical Primer for Realistic Radicals. New York: Vintage
Books.
Hulse, C. (2009, September 10). In Lawmaker’s Outburst, a Rare Breach of Protocol. New York Times,
Retrieved September 27, 2009, from Academic Search Complete database.
Health Care for America Now. (2009, September). Steps to Win. Retrieved from
http://healthcareforamericanow.org/site/content/steps_to_win/
Obama, B. (2009, September). Obama’s Health Care Speech to Congress. Washington D.C., U.S. Capital.
Orenstein, B. (Producer), & Hercules, B. (Director). (2000). The Democratic Promise: Saul
Alinsky and His Legacy. Chicago: Media Process Group.
