On Election Day, Oregon voters rejected a ballot proposition called Measure 23 that would
have instituted universal healthcare in the state. Outspent more than 30 to 1 by a coalition of insurance companies that blanketed the airwaves with negative ads, the only hope for proponents of the measure was fair coverage in the media. Unfortunately, some of the coverage was as slanted as the insurance industry’s advertisements.
On NBC Nightly News‘s election night broadcast, anchor Tom Brokaw previewed a report on Measure 23 this way: “Is universal health care a good idea? It’s on the ballot in Oregon.” Brokaw set the tone from the start, saying the plan “is called free health care. But is it?” Correspondent Roger O’Neil echoes this framing in the first line of his report: “If it sounds too good to be true, the saying goes… Oregon voters will decide if universal free healthcare is free.”
Actually, Measure 23 supporters did not promise “free” healthcare; they promoted their plan as affordable healthcare. “Eliminating the costs incurred for insurance premiums, co-payments, prescription medications, deductibles and all other health care costs, most people will spend less than they do now,” the Yes on 23 website said– never suggesting that their tax-supported plan would cost nothing.
O’Neil prefaces his criticism of Measure 23 with an odd assertion: “With insurance companies raising premiums, with co-pays for prescription drugs going up all the time, with HMOs telling doctors they can’t use the stethoscope on some people anymore and be paid for it, you’d think the industry would welcome the spotlight on universal health care. But Oregon’s big three health insurers are pouring money into the campaign against.”
Actually, the healthcare industry– with the exception of many doctors and nurses– has traditionally opposed universal healthcare plans; a key premise of such proposals is that government funding for health could lower costs– and therefore profits. The insurance industry in particular has strenuously opposed so-called “single-payer” plans for the simple reason that they would eliminate private insurance in favor of government coverage. Yet O’Neil presents predictable industry opposition to Measure 23 as a damning criticism of the proposal.
O’Neil then finds the catch: Insurance companies say “Oregon could go bankrupt, too, since the devil is in the details, spelled T-A-X-E-S. More payroll taxes on business, more taxes on personal income, as much as $25,000 for top wage earners.” Since government-funded healthcare proposals all rely on taxes for funding, it’s hard to see how this is a “detail.” Furthermore, O’Neil distorts the personal tax issue by selecting the $25,000 figure, which is a ceiling that the initiative would have placed on taxes paid by the wealthiest households; these would have to earn at least $300,000, and probably much more than that. To be fair, O’Neil could have noted that poor families would be exempt from the personal income tax.
A serious journalist would investigate whether tax-funded healthcare would be more or less expensive than a system that is largely privately funded. But O’Neil never even mentions that the current system costs money.
Another detail missing from O’Neil’s report is the disclosure that NBC is owned by General Electric, which is heavily invested in the insurance and medical industries.
O’Neil concluded his slanted presentation by dismissing the ballot measure: “This dose of medicine apparently too strong for what most agree is an ailing patient.”
ACTION: Please contact NBC about Roger O’Neil’s election night report on the Oregon universal healthcare ballot measure.
CONTACT: NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw Phone: 212-664-4971 Fax: 212-664-6045nightly@msnbc.com
[Corrected version, 11/14/02]
