Summary
President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare into law on March 23, 2010. It was a health reform bill that he had promised to Americans a year earlier during the presidential campaigns. This happened after a protracted period of discussions, lobbying, backlash, and negotiations that at one point, put his legacy at risk because of a possible failure.
The world was not privy to the level of lobbying that happened behind the scenes, and the cost to his popularity, bipartisan ideals, and open government. These were among the ideals that Obama had promised to base his leadership on after he became president. Renowned FRONTLINE producer Michael Kirk opens the curtain to introduce the public to the occurrences that culminated into the historic legislation that had eluded several administrations.
In the documentary titled Obama’s Deal, Kirk takes viewers on a journey to divulge Obama’s political maneuvering in an effort to transform the US health care system and transform how Washington conducted business. The film includes interviews with senators, lobbyists, and administration officials that discuss Obama’s struggles that were part of the process to enact the ACA into law. He had to make deals with persons of interest in the health care industry and many individuals and organizations that were his political challengers.
The Act was monumental because of the billions of dollars needed to fund it. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle reveals that it involved approximately 20% of the United States’ gross domestic product, a factor that posed a risk of rejection. It was a very expensive affair because Obama spent hundreds of millions of dollars to appease the health care industry stakeholders in order to gain their support. The president sought the expertise of Rahm Emanuel, his chief of staff, and an experienced negotiator to steer the process.
Emanuel gathered a team of congressional insiders who would spearhead the endeavor of health reform. However, the efforts of the team were weakened by the loss of Senator Ted Kennedy, who was an ardent advocate for health reforms in America. As a result, the leadership of Obama’s plan for success was given to the head of the Senate Finance Committee, Senator Max Baucus. Democrats were not confident in his ability to get a win for the White House. According to the documentary, he was one of the main beneficiaries of the money used to conduct lobbying among special interest groups and individuals in the health care industry.
The President encountered resistance from interested parties, hence the need for aggressive lobbying that involved huge financial incentives. Baucus negotiated deals with drug companies, insurance stakeholders, and other interest groups. This happened despite the president’s promise of a different White House, where transparency and accountability would be the guiding principles. Some of the deals were controversial and revealed the president’s determination for health reform. For example, an $80 billion deal with Billy Tauzin, whose role was to lobby on behalf of pharmaceutical companies was harshly criticized.
The industry received an unfair incentive even though it was reaping profits from the sale of medical products. The White House would later sign related deals with opponents of the bill to win them over. For instance, the infamous “Cornhusker Kickback” was an overt lobbying effort that angered many legislators and the public. The deal involved a $100 million incentive for the state of Nebraska in exchange for the support of Senator Ben Nelson. Others included the termination of the public option and the lowering of proposed taxes for makers of medical devices. Secretly, the president was gaining more support and winning. However, the public was fed up with the happenings in Washington and opposed the proposed bill.
The public opposition of the bill was an impetus for Obama to conduct more intensive lobbying because it was on the verge of failing and disgracing his tenure. The president’s team countered resistance from the insurance and pharmaceutical companies by attacking them online. However, the industry countered by claims that the proposed bill would introduce hidden taxes.
Initially, the health industry representative promised publicly to support the president in implementing his health care reform. On the contrary, the interested parties advocated for reforms that would benefit the industry. President Obama was compelled to go against his 2008 campaign promises in order to get their support by removing the public option. The bill was passed and Obama had achieved a historical milestone that several presidents before him had failed to attain.
Reflection
The documentary presents some behind-the-scenes occurrences that led to the passage of the Affordable Care Act. The influence of political lobbying, the use of financial incentives to gain support, and the show of might by key players in the health care industry are revealed. It exposes the political wrangles between Republicans and Democrats that take place before a bill is enacted into law.
The documentary highlights some of the most pivotal moments that were critical in the passage of the bill. They include interviews, Obama’s meetings and pans, and the various deals with Senate lobbyists and representatives of the insurance and pharmaceutical industries. However, the representations are superficial and do not provide detailed information about how the deals were arrived at.
One of the documentary’s main weaknesses is bias. It is unfair for the writers of the film to shed more light on certain aspects of the process and alienate others as they were all equally important. The producer does not promote fairness in covering all the sides of the issue as some are given more coverage than others. For instance, protesters are shown at the Senate Finance Committee meeting shouting down the chairman and presenting their views while being ignored. However, the viewer is not told the reason for the protests or the events that led to the occurrence. In addition, the documentary shows Dr. Margaret Flowers as an interested party in the process of passing the ACA.
However, it does not provide a detailed explanation with regard to her role as an interviewee in the documentary or as a vocal advocate of a single-payer system. In the video, the narrator says that all options were being considered for inclusion in the bill. However, it is evident that the other options were not being considered and the claim was a trick to appease the citizens. It would have been appropriate for the producers to outline all the options that the White House was considering and offer a brief discussion.
Obama promised during his campaigns that universal care would be his priority with regard to health care in America. Therefore, it was expected that his proposed reforms would include single-payer as the preferred system. The documentary centers on showing how the president made deals with the insurance and pharmaceutical companies, thus abdicating his promise of universal health care.
The presentation of events in the film is proof that the president had made a decision from the outset to support the insurance industry through the reforms. The incentives awarded did not promote health care but served to increase revenue for companies in the industry and multiply their customers. It is unethical for FRONTLINE to exclude single payer from the documentary. The reporting is inaccurate and biased, favoring the insurance industry. The exclusion of the most popular national health plan from the documentary is an indication of bias in journalism and the misrepresentation of the truth.
The producers of the documentary also exclude several key occurrences and give shallow discussions of certain events. First, the interviews included are short snippets of discussions carried out with key individuals on what happened behind the curtains. The producers included statements that seem to support their agenda. None of the interviews include a mention of single-payer, which was an important part of the reforms as promised by President Obama during the campaigns.
Second, it focuses more on deals given to the insurance industry and the role played by certain lobbyists as well as the large incentives that they received. The message of the documentary is lost in the misrepresentation of the ACA as legislation that was made possible because the president dished out financial rewards to special interest groups. Third, the producers show very little of the public’s participation in the process of enacting the bill into law. Only a few instances are highlighted: a protest during a Senate Committee meeting, a public protest against the proposed bill, and participation in an Obama rally. The public had a greater role to play and it is not properly covered in the video.