Home | About | Donate

The Divide Between Elite and Public Opinion on Healthcare Highlights America's Democratic Deficit


The Divide Between Elite and Public Opinion on Healthcare Highlights America's Democratic Deficit

Jake Johnson

In 2014, the political scientists Martin Gilens and Benjamin Page released a study revealing that, "In the United States...the majority does not rule — at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites or with organized interests, they generally lose."


Hopefully, the days of one dollar, one vote are nearly done.

The people can't eat money. They can eat the rich.


See you on the streets of Philadelphia. Bernie or Bust!


Because of gerrymandering the House of Representatives is much more conservative than the American people. The Tea Party is over-represented. This is the center of the problem. In Congress the question is not whether we should have single-payer healthcare but whether or not Obamacare should be repealed. If people really want single-payer healthcare they are going to have to elect more Democratic governors and more Democratic state legislators. If they don't really want it they can keep electing Republicans at the state level and get more gerrymandered conservative districts. The change has to come in elections. Right now single payer is an issue in the Democratic primary but in Washington it is of no political importance.


The Lootacracy is integrated, each facet of it working to enhance the profits of another.

As example, I read of a Veteran who paid over $50000 dollars in interest on a 2500$$ loan. His wife had fallen and broken her ankle and he did not have cash enough to pay for her treatment. The bank would not loan money to pay for a medical procedure because there no assets to seize if he did not pay it back. None in his family had enough money to lend him so he went to a payday loan company.

The Payday loan company loves the fact people need to borrow money for medical emergencies and had he broken the law in order to get that money or failed to pay the loan back he would have been arrested and sentenced to the for profit prison industry.

It in the best interests of enitrely different sectors of for profit industries that people are unable to afford medical care as it means a source on revenues to the same.


"The rise of a loudmouthed strongman like Trump, Sullivan contends, is the result of a system in which "barriers to the popular will, especially when it comes to choosing our president, are now almost nonexistent."

Attorneys are taught to debate both sides of a given issue. The premise being that even the guilty deserve a rigorous defense.

Similarly, facile minds can take any truth and invert it. And indeed today's Right wing pro-war & pro-business think tanks do just that.

They redefine torture as the much milder sounding "enhanced interrogation." Everyone likes something that's enhanced.

They take programs of conscientious deforestation and term them forest management.

Some of their loudest pundits decry Affirmative Action and argue that it shows prejudice to white males.

Programs like Obama's repugnant authoritarian one-size-fits-all plethora of mandatory, standardized testing are cast as the newest equivalent of Bush's equally odious, "No Child Left Behind."

In other words, in today's climate of utter deception, those who can take self-evident truths and frame a seemingly viable opposing argument are paid big bucks, given bylines in major print media, and celebrity platforms in TV and radio.

When lies are repeated as often as is the case today, it's no wonder that a significant number of persons believes them.

As I have argued here for 9 years in opposition to the "blame voters/Americans" squad, who is really more guilty: The ones designing propaganda that's so skillful it bypasses the brain's filters or those who fall for it?

The Public's Airwaves MUST be returned to the public! Corporate control of 90% of what becomes collective food for thought is lethal to Democracy... and apparently, the planet.

And KUDOS to Jake Johnson.... another writer who can offer a cogent analysis based on the intersections between a variety of issues, phenomena, and concerns.


Hillary involved with Colorado establishment Dems to defeat ColoradoCare:



Although candidate Obama in 2008 serially criticized former congressman-turned drug industry lobbyist Billy Tauzin for preventing Medicare from negotiating drug prices, Obama met secretly with Tauzin during his first week in the White House to assure him that Obamacare would not allow negotiating drug prices if Tauzin supported Obamacare.


That is an indictment of the USA's health system and private health systems in general.


It is the greatest travesty that the United States does not share in a fair single payer system like those in the rest of the developed world. This is all due to the influence of the profiteers.


This is a huge reason why Sanders is backed by millennials. These unfortunate victims of the Reagan Bush era have no coverage.As the entitled baby boomers and Gen X people die the situation becomes more visible or should I have said more painful Governor Hickenlooper of Colorado is a good example of the Establishment Democrats that Millennials talk about.This Democrat who may become Hillary's Vice Presidential nominee in an alliance with the big insurance greedos, is doing whatever he can to keep the disgraceful medical mess alive and profitable in Colorado.


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


The Study is known as the Page and Gilens Study and yes, it proves that almost all of the time what is passed into law or public policy VIOLATES the wishes and intentions of a majority of citizens.

But then, the Supreme Court tied up the divine right of the oligarchy in its ironically named: Citizens United decision to open the floodgates to Big Money. Thereby, it fully sanctioned the purchasing of politicians through which to do the elites' bidding.

No citizens' rights need apply.


A few years ago, I recall reading about a woman in Oregon who broke her ankle, went to the hospital but all they did was wrap it as if sprained because she didn't have insurance or money. (I thought hospitals were supposed to help people, no matter what, but never mind.) She ended up disabled because of hobbling around on a broken ankle and was only able to get help when she won a lottery for health insurance-- six years later, when she could finally have surgery. Does anyone in any other country in the world think it's acceptable that health coverage is available only for some who are lucky enough to win a lottery? (in a so-called liberal state)


My son has a medical condition called keratoconus. If left untreated he will become legally blind, and he is without his hard contact lenses, which get thicker with every passing year. The cure is a corneal transplant, an incredibly common surgery. He was diagnosed with the condition at 12 years old and is now 22. At the time of the diagnosis, we were told that he would likely have to have corneal transplants between 18 and 22. Until then, the prescribed treatment was to wear hard glass lenses. His eyes have been in a constant state of irritation because of the lenses, and he is legally blind without them, but insurance won't pay until the lens treatment no longer works. Doctors now expect that to occur by the time he is 28.

My health insurance covers all this after my $5000 deductible and he will be able to get insurance that will cover it once he is no longer a dependent. But tell me why my already blind son has to spend every day of his life feeling like someone just stuck a finger in both his eyes before insurance will pay for the cure? Why does his eyesight have to deteriorate even further? Because we're being milked for $2000 a year out of pocket to pay for his exams and lenses. By the time he is actually eligible for the surgery, we will have already paid $32,000 for the lens treatment, probably somewhere near the same amount the surgery will cost. What a racket.