Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: FRIDAY, August 5, 1994 TAG: 9408050076
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A8 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
On the one hand, significant health-care reform seems closer than ever to passage, illustrating Clinton's impressive willingness to tackle and advance long-deferred but important items on the national agenda.
On the other hand, the president's retreat from universal coverage - and it's a retreat, no matter the rhetoric he used at a news conference Wednesday night to dress it up - illustrates the frustrating vacillation that has plagued much of his term in office.
On the one hand, Clinton got it exactly right when he also said Wednesday night that he hopes health-reform will be shaped according to its benefit to the entire country and not for its effect on one special interest or another.
On the other hand, the Whitewater hearings in Congress served as a reminder that the president and first lady have a few special interests of their own.
Regarding Whitewater, the striking fact so far is that - regardless of who inappropriately talked to whom about regulators' investigations into Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan, the defunct Arkansas thrift - the investigations seem to have gone forward as they are supposed to.
Well, one striking fact. The other is the readiness of key administration officials, especially Deputy Treasury Secretary Roger Altman, to be less than candid with Congress about contacts between Treasury and the White House over the issue. The bumbling effort to spare Clinton political embarrassment has simply piled on more embarrassment.
Regarding health-care reform, Clinton said he'd sign the recently proposed plan by Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell - even though at best it would boost from 80 percent to 95 percent the number of Americans covered by health insurance, and then only after several years.
Pragmatic compromise is often a fine thing. But in this instance, Clinton made a flamboyant point in his State of the Union address this past winter of promising to veto any health-reform bill without universal coverage.
Such flip-flops make it all the harder for the president to muster majorities in the face of special-interest opposition, which in the case of health-care reform has been buying advertising at a faster pace than both major-party candidates combined in the 1992 presidential election. The results have been more enlightening about the nation's decision-making process than about the issue.
Forty-nine groups are expected to spend more than $60 million on TV, radio and print ads, hoping to sway public sentiment. More than $50 million already has been spent. One organization - the nonprofit Center for Public Integrity, which has taken no position on health-care reform - estimates that in 1993 and so far in '94, special interests have spent more than $100 million on advertising and direct lobbying combined, including $25 million in contributions to the re-election campaigns of senators and representatives.
Anyone with the money is of course free to buy advertising and make a pitch to the public, whether it's for soap or smoke. Unfortunately, on this critical issue, there's been a lot of smoke. The quick images and finely focused messages of effective advertising hardly lend themselves to thoughtful consideration of such complex legislation. Will lawmakers be able to keep the long-term general welfare in mind?
Will $100 million produce the best health-care system money can buy? If so, for whom?
by CNB