[Publib] 1st Amendment Rights

Wed Aug 5 19:47:57 EDT 2009

www.factcheck.org actually addresses this statement at
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/white-house-fact-checking/ but not really
as a 1st Amendment issue.

--------------------

  White House Fact-Checking

August 5, 2009

 [image: Bookmark and Share] <http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php>

 We welcome competition – or rather, colleagues – in the fact-checking
business. But the latest entrant to our line of work is an entity we’ve
actually fact-checked, and will continue to fact-check. Regularly.

The White House, according to its official blog, is encouraging people to
send along any health care rumors or claims, mainly of the "scary" chain
e-mail variety, that seem "fishy." In its first
installment<http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/>of
these debunking efforts, Linda Douglass, the communications director
for
the Health Reform Office, addresses a posting on the Drudge Report headlined
"Uncovered Video: Obama Explains How His Health Care Plan will ‘Eliminate’
Private Insurance."

In a short video, Douglass says "nothing could be farther from the truth"
and points to clips of statements the president has said recently that
contradict the idea that private insurance would be scrapped: For instance,
Obama has said "if you have insurance that you like then you will be able to
keep that insurance," and "let’s have a system the same way that federal
employees do, the same way that members of Congress do, where, we call it an
exchange, but you can call it a marketplace, where you essentially, you’ve
got have a whole bunch of different plans."

The people who spread falsehoods, Douglass says, are "taking sentences and
phrases out of context and cobbling them together to leave a very false
impression." We certainly agree. But we would have fact-checked this a
little differently, taking on directly the "uncovered
video<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-bY92mcOdk>"
that purports to show Obama saying he would "eliminate" private insurance.

That video shows a clip of Obama speaking at a March 24, 2007, health care
forum <http://www.americanprogressaction.org/events/healthforum/> for
presidential candidates sponsored by the union SEIU and the Center for
American Progress Action Fund. The video claims that the clip shows "Obama
admitting his plan will ELIMINATE private insurance." But that’s not what he
said.

In the clip, Obama said: "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 can envision a decade out or 15 years out or 20
years out …" The full
transcript<http://www.americanprogressaction.org/events/healthforum/obama_transcript.html>from
the event shows that Obama was talking about setting up an insurance
exchange, much like the Federal Employees Health Benefits
Program<http://www.opm.gov/insure/health/planinfo/index.asp>,
through which federal employees buy coverage. (The FEHBP site shows that
several private insurance companies offer coverage to federal employees; a
media representative for the Office of Personnel Management told us there
are 269 health plans offered in total – about 10 national Fee-For-Service
plans plus HMOs that vary by state.) His eliminating "employer coverage" –
not "private" coverage – comment is about people buying insurance through
this exchange or "pool" rather than through their jobs so insurance would be
portable. Here are Obama’s comments in context:

*Obama, March 24, 2007*: Another principle is that it’s going to have to be
some form of pooling of costs of risk. And there are going to be a number of
proposals, and they’re out. I heard in some of the previous questions that
one pool would be the federal pool that already exists for myself and other
federal workers. Some states, like California and Massachusetts, already
started to set up their pools. Whatever the mechanism, we going to have to
have a pooling system so that individuals have the benefits of being part of
a larger group. …

As I indicated before, I think that we’re going to have to have some system
where people can buy into a larger pool. 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. 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 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. And I think we’ve got to facilitate that
and let individuals make that choice to transition out of employer coverage.

This "uncovered video" then cuts to a clip of Obama speaking at an AFL-CIO
event back in 2003. We
wrote<http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/factchecking_debate_no_3.html>about
that video last October after the third presidential debate. It’s true
that Obama said at that forum that he was “a proponent of a single-payer
health care program,” adding, “that’s what I’d like to see. And as all of
you know, we may not get there immediately.” But that was six years ago, and
as a presidential candidate, and as president, Obama has said he would be in
favor of such a system if "starting from scratch." Instead, he has said he
wants to build on the system we have.

We pointed this out
again<http://factcheck.org/2009/06/campaigning-on-single-payer/>in
June when former presidential candidate and Massachusetts Gov. Mitt
Romney claimed that Obama called for a single-payer system "when he was
campaigning." Recently, Obama has been responding to questions from
single-payer fans at town hall events, asking why he isn’t calling for such
a system.

Posted by Lori Robertson
<http://www.factcheck.org/author/lori-robertson/>on Wednesday, August
5, 2009 at 2:17 pm
Filed under The FactCheck Wire <http://www.factcheck.org/category/wire/> ·
Tagged with Barack Obama <http://www.factcheck.org/tag/barack-obama/>, health
care <http://www.factcheck.org/tag/health-care/>, health
insurance<http://www.factcheck.org/tag/health-insurance/>,
White House <http://www.factcheck.org/tag/white-house/>

On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 4:37 PM, Diedre Conkling <diedre08 at gmail.com> wrote:

> The link contributed is a good one and gives more information on the
> issue.   I hope that, as librarians, you are interested in finding out the
> facts and more complete information and will click on the link.
>
> As far as health care issues go, and other political issue, I find it
> helpful to look at http://www.factcheck.org/ .  They seem to do a fair job
> saying what is true, what is a bit of a stretch and what is false.
>
> Enjoy.
>
>   On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Lisa Guidarini <lguidarini at aapld.org>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From White House blog (
>> http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/ ):
>>
>>
>>
>> “There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there,
>> spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care.  These
>> rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through
>> casual conversation.  Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the
>> White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see
>> something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it
>> to flag at whitehouse.gov .”
>>
>>
>>
>> Thought police?
>>
>> If this is repugnant to you, please flood the email address above with:
>>
>>
>>
>> *Subject*: 1st Amendment of Our Constitution
>>
>> *Amendment 1** - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression<http://www.usconstitution.net/constnot.html#exp>.
>> Ratified <http://www.usconstitution.net/constamrat.html#BoR> 12/15/1791.*
>> *Note <http://www.usconstitution.net/constnotes.html#Am1>*
>>
>> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
>> prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
>> or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
>> petition the Government for a redress<http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#REDRESS>of grievances.
>>
>>
>>
>> Lisa Guidarini
>>
>> Adult Program Coordinator
>>
>> Algonquin Area Public Library District
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Publib mailing list
>> Publib at webjunction.org
>> http://lists.webjunction.org/mailman/listinfo/publib
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Diedre Conkling
> Lincoln County Library District
> P.O. Box 2027
> Newport, OR  97365
> Work phone & fax:  541-265-3066
> Work email:  diedre at beachbooks.org
> Home email:  diedre08 at gmail.com
>

-- 
Diedre Conkling
Lincoln County Library District
P.O. Box 2027
Newport, OR  97365
Work phone & fax:  541-265-3066
Work email:  diedre at beachbooks.org
Home email:  diedre08 at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.webjunction.org/wjlists/publib/attachments/20090805/58b87313/attachment.htm