# The administration goes Orwell. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 10, 2009, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938 "2009-08-10T16:26:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/41 "2009-08-10T20:34:52Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > As I understand the full quote, it’s about giving people more control over who their insurer is, not leaving that decision in the hands of their employer. I believe his communication director is correct. Let’s see if this helps: [QUOTE=Obama] As I indicated before, I think that we’re going to have to have some system where people can buy into a larger pool. [/QUOTE] \*What we have now is not working well. \* [QUOTE=Obama] Right now their pool typically is the employer, but there are other ways of doing it. I would like to – I would hope that we could set up a system that allows those who can go through their employer to access a federal system or a state pool of some sort. [/QUOTE] _There are other options. I’d like to see something that gives employees the option to keep what they have or shop elsewhere._ [QUOTE=Obama] \*\*But I don’t think we’re going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately. There’s going to be potentially some transition process. \*\* [/QUOTE] _It is my ideal and ultimate desire to eliminate employer sponsored coverage altogether. Although I realize we can’t just snap our fingers and have that be the case. It will have to happen over time._ [QUOTE=Obama] I can envision a decade out or 15 years out or 20 years out where we’ve got a much more portable system. Employers still have the option of providing coverage, but many people may find that they get better coverage, or at least coverage that gives them more for health care dollars than they spend outside of their employer. [/QUOTE] _I think that transition period will last 15 or 20 years. During that time employees would have the option of sticking with what they have or tapping into an option that gives them a better deal._ [QUOTE=Obama] And I think we’ve got to facilitate that and let individuals make that choice to transition out of employer coverage. [/QUOTE] _The government has to set things in motion, to help employees have the option to opt out of the employee-sponsored plan._ The bolded part is where he clearly admits his bias. (Whether he’s right or wrong is immaterial.) ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/42 "2009-08-10T20:38:27Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > Besides the pretty clear violation of the Privacy Act, just the notion of turning ordinary people into junior informers over something that isn’t even a crime is just stomach turning to me. Oh, I don’t think you have anything to worry about; you have never even sent me any email… ---
**Author:** ![MOIDALIZE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@MOIDALIZE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MOIDALIZE)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/43 "2009-08-10T20:39:05Z")
The neckbeards are restless. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/44 "2009-08-10T20:40:58Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > Except that making a comment about the possibility of eliminating employer based insurance is not the same thing as eliminating private insurance. So, in that case his communications director is right The point is that some people are concerned that UHC might lead to a single payer system. And what the President would ultimately want is important information to have, given the power he has to steer things and tip the scales. The point is what is his _desire_? > [@cosmosdan](#): > > My question was did Obama , or his communication director deny that he said what was in those clips, or did she merely claim that the meaning was distorted by being taken out of context. Two different things. She said the information was “incorrect”. Whatever the hell that means—it’s Obama’s very own words. And Frank’s. and I forget who that woman was. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/45 "2009-08-10T20:41:15Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > …The bolded part is where he clearly admits his bias… That his _opinion_, which may be based upon a bias, but is not the same thing. Nice try, though. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/46 "2009-08-10T20:42:29Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > That his _opinion_, which may be based upon a bias, but is not the same thing. Nice try, though. Huh? He’s shows that his bias is for a single payer system. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/47 "2009-08-10T21:00:47Z")
But only in a hypothetical system that had never had employer based insurance to begin with. Do you not see the difference? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/48 "2009-08-10T21:01:02Z")
Once again, **magellan** , the alternative to employer coverage is not, as the video claims, “eliminat[ion] of private insurance.” When Obama talks about “a larger pool,” that’s just a reference to insurance: when you buy insurance, you buy into a larger pool. If employer insurance is eliminated, you may end up with a system in which people purchase insurance through private insurance or through a government plan. As another point, focusing on his phrasing of “eliminate employer insurance” seems problematic to me. The status quo may be referred to as “employer insurance,” since that’s overwhelmingly the main way in which the insured receive insurance in the US. Obama may well have been speaking in shorthand, referring to the current system as “employer insurance,” and talking about how we can’t “eliminate employer insurance immediately” as a way of saying that transitioning to a system in which employer insurance is one of many options will take awhile. It beggars belief to think he wants to reach a point in which no employer offers insurance. There’s no indication I have ever seen in anything else he’s said that he’d desire such a situation. Given the possibility that he slipped up and revealed his secret plan here, or that he was using a shorthand, the latter seems far likelier. To reiterate: the alternative to employer insurance isn’t the “eliminat[ion] of private insurance.” ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/49 "2009-08-10T21:01:47Z")
> [@Obama](#): > > But I don’t think we’re going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately. There’s going to be potentially some transition process. > [@magellan01](#): > > It is my ideal and ultimate desire to eliminate employer sponsored coverage altogether. Although I realize we can’t just snap our fingers and have that be the case. It will have to happen over time. At what point does he say that his ideal is to eliminate employer sponsored coverage altogether? He doesn’t say that. He says that employer coverage can’t be eliminated immediately. He never says whether that is a good or bad thing, he just says it. You infer that he wishes it could be eliminated, but the plain text of the quote doesn’t say anything of the sort. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/50 "2009-08-10T21:08:27Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > _:shrugs:_ > > Obama said he believed the transition away from employer- to federal and/or state insurance would not happen immediately, but might take as much as ten or fifteen years. If you want to interpret 'it might take a while" as 'it will never happen", well, have at it. Be aware that this kind of manipulation of language is a subject much addressed by the author in the OP’s title. > > Regards, > Shodan No that is not what he said although that is clearly what the video was intended to imply. He did not say or even strongly imply an elimination of _private_ insurance. He said he wanted a federal or state **option** available to those who lose their employer insurance. Meaning they can choose what works best for them. Then in a separate edited clip he spoke of eventually eliminating employer based health care over a period of years, which still leaves private insurance intact and people can choose what works best. That’s in line with what they are proposing now which is a public option to encourage insurance companies to compete and offer more people more affordable health care. So, once again , you have failed to support your previous statement. Where exactly did Obama specifically propose eliminating private insurance and then deny saying it? ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/51 "2009-08-10T21:41:00Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > The point is that some people are concerned that UHC might lead to a single payer system. And what the President would ultimately want is important information to have, given the power he has to steer things and tip the scales. The point is what is his _desire_? Perhaps those people can explain why that is such a horrible option. I think many are concerned because the opposition is purposely distorting the facts to create a fear of a single payer system. Doesn’t it make sense that his desire might be to offer better more affordable health care for US citizens and the form it takes is secondary to that goal? In 2003 it appears he supported a single payer system and had other ideas in 2007. Neither of those things shows he’s trying to push something on us we don’t want and isn’t right for us. Perhaps he still believes a single payer system is the best alternative. That doesn’t mean he’s closed to viable and senseable compromises. Why doesn’t someone just ask him directly “Is your plan to gradually establish a single payer system?” let him answer and be done with it. In the meantime people might remember that a single payer system does not eliminate all private insurance, so we can stop that lie from being repeated. > [@](#): > > She said the information was “incorrect”. Whatever the hell that means—it’s Obama’s very own words. And Frank’s. and I forget who that woman was. She said it was edited to misrepresent his position. That’s what that means and she’s correct. She explained it perfectly well and Kurtz got it wrong. Do you think that was intentional? Since she works for Obama what Frank and that woman said is irrelevant. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/52 "2009-08-10T21:44:12Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > At what point does he say that his ideal is to eliminate employer sponsored coverage altogether? > > He doesn’t say that. He says that employer coverage can’t be eliminated immediately. He never says whether that is a good or bad thing, he just says it. > > You infer that he wishes it could be eliminated, but the plain text of the quote doesn’t say anything of the sort. Um, well yeah it kinda does. What it doesn’t do is endorse an elimination of all private insurance since employer and private insurance are not the same thing. I think he’s advocating insurance pools not linked to a specific job so people can choose what they want and take it to any job. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/53 "2009-08-10T22:06:38Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Once again, **magellan** , the alternative to employer coverage is not, as the video claims, “eliminat[ion] of private insurance.” Why do you keep repeating this. No one is saying that the two are on a toggle switch that if you flick it and turn ON giving employees an option you turn OFF private insurance. No one is claiming that. The point is that one might lead to the other, with gradations in between. And some people think that it will, in fact, LEAD to the elimination of employer-sponsored insurance. Are you not aware of this fear, even among many people who strongly advocate health care reform? > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > It beggars belief to think he wants to reach a point in which no employer offers insurance. There’s no indication I have ever seen in anything else he’s said that he’d desire such a situation. Given the possibility that he slipped up and revealed his secret plan here, or that he was using a shorthand, the latter seems far likelier. There are people that hold that opinion. A single payer system would do that. He is on video advocating a single payer system when he was a Senator. Barney Frank supports that same position. as does that woman. For you to attempt to portray this as some fantastical notion that exists primarily in the heads of some conspiracy theorists is absurd. > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > To reiterate: the alternative to employer insurance isn’t the “eliminat[ion] of private insurance.” To reiterate: (see above) ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/54 "2009-08-10T22:10:19Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > At what point does he say that his ideal is to eliminate employer sponsored coverage altogether? > > He doesn’t say that. He says that employer coverage can’t be eliminated immediately. He never says whether that is a good or bad thing, he just says it. > > You infer that he wishes it could be eliminated, but the plain text of the quote doesn’t say anything of the sort. Sigh. Did I say that that he used those EXACT words. No, I didn’t. Do you not understand that I posted each of his lines and then under them added my take on it? I think not. If you did, you wouldn’t come back with: b-b-but he didn’t _say_ that. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/55 "2009-08-10T22:18:36Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > So, once again , you have failed to support your previous statement. Where exactly did Obama specifically propose eliminating private insurance and then deny saying it? First, can we agree that is something he’s advocated? “But I don’t think we’re going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately. There’s going to be potentially some transition process.” “I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan…a single-payer health care plan, a universal health care plan.” ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/56 "2009-08-10T22:36:12Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > First, can we agree that is something he’s advocated? > > “But I don’t think we’re going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately. There’s going to be potentially some transition process.” > > “I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan…a single-payer health care plan, a universal health care plan.” Sure. Let’s also note that the video and you take things out of chronological order in order to create it’s impression. The 2nd you mentioned was in 2003 before he was a Senator. The 1st is 4 years later and he doesn’t mention single payer. He is only talking about the gradual elimination of employment based health care {not private insurance} No realistic conclusion can be based on those two separate statements made years apart. Is it possible he still favors single payer? Sure. Is he currently advocating that? No. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/57 "2009-08-10T22:55:44Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Why do you keep repeating this. No one is saying that the two are on a toggle switch that if you flick it and turn ON giving employees an option you turn OFF private insurance. The video you linked to says > [@video](#): > > EVIDENCE OBAMA AND THE DEMS [sic] HEALTH CARE GOAL IS A GOVERNMENT PUBLIC OPTION THAT WILL ULTIMATELY ELIMINATE PRIVATE INSURANCE Not “might” lead to the elimination of private insurance. Not “will, in fact, LEAD to the elimination of employer-sponsored insurance.” The video says it “WILL ULTIMATELY ELIMINATE PRIVATE INSURANCE.” Do you agree with the video’s claim? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/58 "2009-08-10T22:58:15Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > No realistic conclusion can be based on those two separate statements made years apart. Is it possible he still favors single payer? Sure. Is he currently advocating that? No. The other point that’s relevant here is the difference between a preference and a position. A preference is what you’d love to see, and I think that’s what Obama expressed in 2003. A position is a formally-staked-out political desire that you work toward–and I’ve never seen Obama take a position in favor of single-payer, as opposed to expressing a preference for it. For all I care, my local politician might favor a return to leeches and voodoo candles, as long as his position expressed via votes is in favor of a plan with universal coverage for all through scientifically-backed medical care. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2009, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/59 "2009-08-10T23:01:58Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > The video you linked to says > > Not “might” lead to the elimination of private insurance. Not “will, in fact, LEAD to the elimination of employer-sponsored insurance.” The video says it “WILL ULTIMATELY ELIMINATE PRIVATE INSURANCE.” > > Do you agree with the video’s claim? Good point. The title of the video in question is an outright lie. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2009, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938/60 "2009-08-11T00:44:34Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > The other point that’s relevant here is the difference between a preference and a position. A preference is what you’d love to see, and I think that’s what Obama expressed in 2003. A position is a formally-staked-out political desire that you work toward–and I’ve never seen Obama take a position in favor of single-payer, as opposed to expressing a preference for it. Wow. Nice politician-speak. Seriously, don’t you think what someone’s preference is matters—particularly when there’s a fear that one might lead to the other? > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > For all I care, my local politician might favor a return to leeches and voodoo candles, as long as his position expressed via votes is in favor of a plan with universal coverage for all through scientifically-backed medical care. In your example there is no fear that one might lead to the other. This is a legitimate concern. I don’t know if that will happen. You don’t either. But this is a big part of the health care debate. It’s disingenuous to pooh-pooh it or marginalize it. Not that I think that will stop you. [QUOTE=cosmosdan] Good point. The title of the video in question is an outright lie. [/QUOTE] No it’s not. It’s an opinion. Can you prove that it is false? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-administration-goes-orwell/505938.md?page=4)