By Larry Untermeyer
An opinionated and vociferous crowd of more than 1,000, including many Westporters, gathered in the Norwalk High School auditorium tonight to express their feelings, both for and against, proposed health care reform. 
A man gestures to the crowd tonight at a health care forum hosted by Congressman Jim Himes (rear) at Norwalk High School. (CLICK TO ENLARGE) Larry Untermeyer for WestportNow.com
The audience members were extremely vocal in stating their opinions, while Congressman Jim Himes (D-4) in a calm and dignified manner listened and responded to all who spoke. Tonight’s meeting was one of several that the congressman has held throughout his district.
Himes’s sedate manner contrasted sharply with the boisterous yelling of the apparently organized opponents of any form of health care reform, many of whom seemed unwilling to listen to any reasonable explanation of the proposals.
At times, the noise of the hecklers was so loud that the congressman could hardly be heard.
Alert Norwalk police kept the unruly crowd under control and the meeting concluded without any violence.
At one point, a man wrestled the microphone away from another person and was asked to leave the forum.
There was a large faction of dissenters, but also a large group who spoke out in favor of health care reform and applauded Himes.
One woman, who was especially moving, described her cancer condition and explained that her head scarf was not a decorative accessory. 
Kathy Lewton of Stamford, who said she is suffering from cancer, described her concerns about her future and the mounting costs of her medical treatment at tonight’s meeting. (CLICK TO ENLARGE) Larry Untermeyer for WestportNow.com
She expressed deep concern about her future and the mounting costs of her medical treatment.
She was only one of a number of speakers who described their unfortunate conditions.
In spite of the many negative aspects of the town meeting, the evening as a whole was a memorable experience for all who were there.
Himes, who spoke without notes, said that he will return to Congress with much information that he gathered from these meetings with his constituents.
He called the health care debate “one of the most important reforms and legislative initiatives that we may see in our lifetimes.”
I was there, too, and got a distinctly different impression of the opponents. Jim Himes could have been there to talk about the price of eggs and the opponents would have behaved the same way. The opponents were not there to oppose health-care reform; they oppose Pres. Obama, as they have since January 20. Evidence? Two salient happenings (1) When Rep. Himes entered the stage and pepole politely started clapping, the opponents felt the need to boo without him having said a word. (2) When Rep. Himes referred to a truly innovative article on health-care that appeared in yesterday’s New York Times, the opponents booed at the mention of the Times.
Let me go on. Were many proponents organized? Probably, especially having seen how the oppoistion has worked at meetings elsewhere in the country, but so were many of the opponents, who reacted in unison to every point they agreed or disagree with, as if they had a mental playbook they were following. What was particularly disconcerrting were the uncaring comments some objectors made in reaction to the health-care horror stories recited by indiividual speakers.
Who won? Rep. Himes; he took even the most outrageous and misinformed comments and responded to the questioner with the simple truth. Mr. Himes appears determined to have a good health-care reform act and to avoid the terrible problems that ensued the last time Congress rushed through a piece of massive, unread legislation in the waning months of 2001.
Dick those opposed to Obama’s policies are together; we oppose the so-called “stimulus” bill, the “cap and tax” bill, the auto industry bailout, the Wall St. bailout, the omni-bus spending bill and now “health care reform”.
As far as people booing at the mention of the NYT; just try mentioning Fox News to a group of liberals and see the reaction you get.
And I don’t recall you standing up to denounce the outrageous comments and effigies aimed at the last administration.
And yes, I also give Jim Himes props for a. having a Townhall and b. for handling the Q & A well.
John, I learned early on in this debate that if you oppose anything put forward by this administration, you are labeled a racist. That’s how they handle criticism, just ask Bill Clinton. Jim Himes does deserve credit for having a townhall meeting, but we all know that his mind is already made up, and I’m sure that’s why he was booed when he walked on stage.
I’m currently retired from a company that eliminated their retiree health insurance benefit many years ago in an effort to cut costs. They felt that since retirees have the Medicare option, it is no longer necessary for them to retain that retiree benefit. Most corporations have dropped the retiree health insurance benefit for this very same reason. So at my age, I have no options, I must settle for Medicare, and my Medicare premiums are twice what I was paying when I had employer insurance, and I have less coverage. This is exactly what will happen with Obama’s private/public option…..eventually there will no longer be a private option. But you will never convince Obama supporters that his eventual goal is to get to a single payer system, even though Obama is on record as saying that “we can’t eliminate employer insurance immediately, it will take a decade or maybe 15 or 20 years”. Those who support him still believe that he really wants to give us a choice.
So it’s really not worth discussing it with his followers, because until they lose their current insurance (and it may take several years before that happens), they just won’t believe that eventually we will have a complete government controlled system.
Try asking young people how much Medicare premiums will cost them and you will be amazed at some of the answers you get. Most think that it is free.
Rich, that’s why I always say, “you can lead a liberal to the truth, but you can’t make them think”.
Last century Social Security Insurace was the most important piece of legislation in history. The government started a system that was to be a life support for old and those in need. The idea was admirable but soon became just a huge tax burden an even bigger government boondoggle which now has all convinced the cost of us baby boomers will bankrupt the system. The government used the money in trust for covering deficits, the bureaucracy is a nightmare dollar sucking black hole.
Just imagine how the Feds will handle Healthcare Insurance.
The need and objective should be to streamline healthcare and cut costs and regulation. We are sinking in debt and the current proposal is like throwing us an anvil to “save” us.
Congress and the Senate have a terrible approval rating and their performance is disgraceful. Boos are in order as I see it.
I was there, and the only “apparently organized” were not the opponents, it was the proponents. They were the ones who held professionally printed signs and they were the ones who were notified today by ACORN via email and phone calls to “be there early” so that they may get in and up front. Some people I talked to passed this information on to Jim Himes.
There was no evidence at all of any organizing by those opposed to Obama care. I talked to many including Huffington Post contributor and fellow Westporter MaryAnn West (who is a lovely person even though we disagree on this topic).
And lastly, I wouldn’t call the democratic process “negative”. Why is it you’re “patriotic” if your opposed to the president and protest when he’s a Republican, but when it’s a Democrat we are “UN-American”, “mobs”, “evil mongers” and “racists”?
Here’s a clip of what Hillary Clinton thinks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJxmpTMGhU0&feature=related
I was there and I definitely felt the pro-reform group consisted of significantly more than half the audience. I was particularly impressed with the bravery of those willing to share their personal stories and the eloquency of the physicians who spoke in support of a public option from their own very personal experiences.
We don’t give a credit card when we call the police for help. And the fire department doesn’t prioritize how quickly they come to your burning house based on what deductible you have the level of plan you are capable of buying. Shouldn’t healthcare be a right of citizenship? Shouldn’t need and not means dictate care?
We also don’t give a credit card to the ambulance driver when he shows up to take you to the hospital. Nobody is turned down at the emergency room. So need apparently does dictate care. And I don’t think that the fire department is going to pay to have your house rebuilt. So I’m not getting the analogy here. I guess we could also add home ownership as a right of every citizen. And I need a car to get to work. And the list goes on…………….
Seriously, you don’t get the analogy? Um – emergency room is not health care. Emergency rooms are the most expensive place to get treatment. Having a doctor to go to for a cold is cheaper than going to the emergency room for pneumonia. Police, fire departments are shared-risk government “programs” that allow the citizens of this country to have protections. You don’t think being healthy is something that all citizens deserve. Ok. It’s cruel but a valid point. I think health is a right of being a citizen of this country as does every single advanced industrial nation in this world (except the US). But the rest of your argument is bogus. Owning a house is a choice. Owning a car is a choice. Getting cancer isn’t. But not everyone believes every taxpayer in this country deserves a chance to live a healthy life. You and I will just have to disagree about that.
Hope and Change = More debt, more taxes, more welfare regulation, more government, more wasteful spending, 55 czars and more corruption.
I was there and I would say that more than 80 percent were
against the health care plan. Most of the Pro camp
had pre-printed Kinko signs so they were easy to spot.
They are also looked like the same ones I saw at the Greenwich Town hall meeting.
I am going to the Bridgeport Town Hall and expect to
see the Kinko crowd, Acorn and Seiu.
Government run anything is a bad idea. We should fix
social security and medicare with both have a liability of over 60 trillion that is non supportable.
We are creating a society of entitlements and no your not entitled to free health care. That is not a right. I pay for my own health care and everybody should do the same. Last time I checked, the US government is broke
so how do they expect to pay for everybody’s health care. And where are all the doctors coming from to support all the so-called 50 million uninsured(which is really more like 8 million).
The government tried to provide housing for everyone and look how that turned out.
The reason that those opposed booed where because they
already heard all Jim Himes talking points. They already knew what he was going to say before he said it. They know that Himes has already made up his mind and will
never go against Reid and Pelosi.
The ones who were organized were the red shirts with the Kinko signs…the moveon.org, acorn and the SEIU crowd
sitting in front as they were led in early.
Shame on you Larry Untermeyer for trying to write a bias
article and thinking you can sleep it by.
You should wrote for Huffington Post, NYT and Daily Kos
as they do the same thing.
For those WestportNow readers who won’t spend a dime on the New York TImes, but still like to remain informed, here is a cut-and-paste link to the article that Rep. Himes mentioned in Norwalk:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/02/business/economy/02leonhardt.html?scp=1&sq=changfing%20health%20care%20steps&st=cse
P.S. Once was enough, so I did not go to Bridgeport last night. The Conn. Post had an article and pictures, including one showing a sign saying “ObamaCare is Fascism”… an interesting contrast to those who call it “Socialism.” Maybe it’s neither and is right in the middle.
Dick, you made me laugh. That should appease the critics and satisfy the progressives. Obama’s trying to re-brand his health care package and improve his image anyway.
“ObamaCare: It’s not socialism, it’s not fascism – It’s the cure”*
* This message approved by all 55 Czars.
And it meets the truth in advertising standards.
John, Thank you for the nice comments about me, you are correct, I doubt we would aree about much. I have attched te link to Huffington Post
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mary-ann-west/if-we-get-this-wrong_b_276334.html
Mary Ann West
Mary Ann, Good article, fair account of events considering your left of center viewpoint. And I don’t mean that with any disrespect, I acknowledge my own right of center view point. However, it’s just one thing; if the left would have denounced its guerrilla tactics with regard to illegal immigration, anti-war protesters, anti-G8 summits and anything G.W. Bush did, then I would have more respect for your side being upset with rowdy protesters. However, your side invented and perfected this method, including your number one community organizer. “Get in there face” is how he recently described how to change the minds of people. But since there was only deafening silence for many years while using these tactics upon us, I find it very disingenuous from your side now to be shocked at the indecorous behavior of these protesters.
Just a quick trip down memory lane (since we so easily forget).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJ7vcgQjkDQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sQl5BCI-qo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0VfLoCP2vw&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJxmpTMGhU0
On a side note, I do find it amusing that of all the people, and we don’t even have similar views, we find each other in a crowd of 1,200. See in the end we aren’t that different, we both have passion for our beliefs, our community and our political process. It’s just that I hope the story ends my way!
Avoir, mon ami
I linked the wrong video in my above post, the first link should of been this one:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m7naTR5QCxo&feature=video_response
Kudos to Rep. Himes for conducting a number of these meetings, and kudos to both sides for turning out and making their points, however loudly, whether grass roots or astroturf. Anyone familiar with US history knows that our democracy is loud and messy, and that’s probably the way most of us like it, at least when it’s “our side” making the noise.
For what it’s worth, I will observe that this whole discussion suffers from, at a minimum, some problems in terminology.
There doesn’t seem to be any good reason to refer to the proposals in Congress as “ObamaCare” because the President has not really defined what it is he wants. He let the Democrats in Congress draft bills, for which he has offered vague and unspecific support, but he does not seem to have provided much guidance to Congress as to what he really would prefer to see. As far as I can tell, he has offered only a mushy pablum of left-leaning bromides, not any specific plan. Perhaps his planned speech next week will change this.
I also see no justification for referring to opponents of this legislation as “anti-reform.” I suspect most Americans want some kind of reform in health care funding, but opinions differ widely. Those who object to the present proposals before Congress may well have dramatically different ideas about reform, but those ideas have not been presented as legislation (shame on the opposition party, which has yet to offer any alternative). If one favours tort reform, interstate insurance competition, no mandated coverage of specific conditions, and allowing insurers to price for risk, one wants some very large reforms, but one can’t support anything that’s in front of Congress at the moment.
The term “health care reform” is also a bit problematic. No American lacks health care. Not one. Many Americans lack health insurance, though the vaunted 40-odd million, while perhaps “accurate” covers a lot of different situations (wealthy people who self insure; young healthy people who think they’re invincible; illegal aliens, to name a few).What is being debated is the reform of health care funding. That said, if the current proposals are passed into law, the material changes in funding methods will, in time, also affect what care is delivered and to whom, whether by design or due to the law of unintended consequences. So perhaps “health care reform” is accurate, but that may be a derivative result rather than the goal. Or not!
Raina, now you are trying to change the discussion to the cost of treatment. What happened to “need dictating care”? I have sat in an emergency rooms before and watched people come in with a backache issue, the flu, and a myriad of other non-catastrophic problems, and none of them were turned away. OK, so it cost more and the average citizen pays the bill, but bottom line, they are getting care which supposedly was your concern. Do you honestly think that the taxpayer is going to save a bundle with government controlled care? I have experience with Medicare and it’s costing me a lot more in premiums than what I was previously paying. And to think that I spent 43 years paying into the Medicare system only to find out when I turned 65 I would be paying twice as much each month than my employer insurance cost me, and I’m getting less coverage. Those government “deals” are terrific.
Certainly, everyone hopes to live a healthy life, but I don’t know about “deserves” since people have choices to make. Sorry to break this to you, but everything in this world isn’t fair. Ask yourself how many people who don’t have health insurance have a cable TV hookup and a cellphone. In my mind that makes health insurance a choice. They might not have insurance, but they can get care. That’s why many people who can afford insurance, don’t want it. It’s called scamming the system.
If you went to last nights meeting and listened to some folks tell their personal horror stories and that tugged at your heart strings, then think about the number of veterans who are under the government’s V.A. care, and believe me, their horror stories can be far worse. If Obamacare passes, do you think that it will bring an end to the horror stories? It isn’t difficult to find people who are more than willing to talk about their horrific healthcare experience. I could talk about some of my own, but then if it didn’t fit your agenda, it really wouldn’t matter to you. There will always be horror stories regardless of who’s footing the bill.
I’m not going to engage in the arguments here except for one. I was there last night also, and the pro-reform crowd (if you want to call it that) far outweighed the opponents. Not that this is supposed to be a popularity contest.
My concerns are not with the positions taken by various parties, and those position vary all over the lot, but in the behavior of many opponents to the President, which I found truly intimidating.
The quotation, ” “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it,” misattributed to Voltaire but considered a good summary of what he believed, has been hikjacked by the protesters to be: “I disapprove of what you say and will do all I can to prevent you from saying it.”
I agree with Mr. Goedde that it’s extremely frustrating to find you don’t have the ear of your elected representatives. It was pretty clear that Mr. Himes has made up his mind on this issue (a few details aside), which begs the question: Why a town hall meeting at all? I was feeling angry myself, and I agree with the man!
Sitting there, gritting my teeth, I realized that my anger is really two deeper emotions: Fear and sadness.
Fear: I posit everyone in that room is afraid of the same thing—not having access to good health care. And in order to blunt that fear, most of us are masters of externalization, blaming our feelings on someone else: Corporate boards, government mismanagement, industry lobbyists, overregulation of a system that has resulted in medical advances. All of these positions are rational—there’s plenty of evidence to support them.
But in the end, these well-reasoned, factual discussions are just intellectual distractions that insulate us from the real issue, which is that we are deeply, deeply afraid that by changing the system, we’ll put our lives at risk, and we are willing to scratch and claw our way to the top to make sure WE are the ones to get hold of the limited resources.
Sadness: My heart hurts that we’re still stuck in the us/them paradigm. Because unless we die suddenly, ALL of us will want medical care at some point. And all but the sociopaths among us (even those who don’t believe health care is a “right”), don’t like to see other people suffer. If we can hold those two truths in our heads at the same time, realizing our goals are similar, we might get somewhere here.
History shows us that societies can either go down fighting, or create synergistic communities in which the whole is better than the sum of its parts.
I believe we can meet all our needs if we can stop seeing each other as impediments,and learn to empathize (with ourselves and with each other). To do that takes a heck of a lot more time, patience, and courage than it does to “take a stand”—whether we carefully articulate our positions, clap and yell, or “fight.”
I hope we rise to the challenge, because if we stay mired in our anger, we’re going down.
One has to laugh at those on the left who are soooooo upset at the behavior of the opponents of our esteemed leader. As Mr. Raho stated in his above post, and it bears repeating: “if the left would have denounced its guerrilla tactics with regard to illegal immigration, anti-war protesters, anti-G8 summits and anything G.W. Bush did, then I would have more respect for your side being upset with rowdy protesters. However, your side invented and perfected this method, including your number one community organizer.
Stacy, I couldn’t agree with you more that no one wants to see people suffer and we should all have access to quality medical care. I think where you are missing the boat is that not everyone in the room shares your fear of not having access to good health care. Polling data has shown that over 85% of those who currently have health insurance are satisfied with it, and an equal number think that the quality of the care they get is very good. There are ways to make sure that everyone has access to good health care without a complete overhaul of the current system. There is no doubt that our health care is expensive and costs could certainly be trimmed, but nobody has convinced me that the only way to trim costs is with a complete overhaul. I find the age old saying that “you get what you pay for” to have meaning in this debate. I spent a lot of time in England during my career and was friends with a lot of Brits, and from what I have been told by those folks, there is no way that I would want to spend my waning years in England. Sure it’s free, but show me the quality.
As far as the sadness that you feel, I think that unless you come to grips with the fact that it will always be an us/them mentality, you will spend the rest of your life in a very sad mental state. Democrats won’t even consider tort reform which could significantly reduce health care costs and their goal is complete control of the system, and Republicans in no way will support a government controlled system which they feel will reduce the quality of care. And as I said earlier, there’s as much misinformation coming from the administration as there is from the right. Both sides are trying to make a case and consequently the facts used are pretty loose. But it’s been that way for years and I don’t see it changing anytime soon.
I know that you and I will never agree with where the control of the health care system belongs, and so it goes with others who have posted here. So, unless the public option is totally dropped, the Republicans will never agree to a plan, and liberal Democrats have clearly said that without the public option, they will not support the plan. So that’s how it sits, us against them.
Very well said Mr. Bruce, very well said.
Mr. Lowenstein’s description of the meeting (2nd post) seems pretty apt to me. And I agree: Once was enough. I was really eager to hear a rational debate that would incorporate concerns of the “right” AND the “left,” as I share many of them on both sides. Alas, it was nothing more than a Ventathon. I know democracy is messy, but this was a Category 5 waste of time.
What I find especially irksome is that we naive, pinko-fascist liberals have already met the naysayers halfway: There are a lot of us who would like to see for-profit medicine in this country gone, once and for all. The proposals under debate in Washington leave plenty of room for the market to work its much-vaunted magic.
I’m proud to see elected officials, from Barney Frank to Al Franken and Jim Himes, working so hard to communicate with their 527’d constituents. Unlike apologists for the previous administration, who just said, “trust me,” they’re trying to include everyone in the discussion.
In regards to Mr. Bruce’s well-stated points above, it’s not just health care funding that’s being debated, but the nature of health care itself: Should the gatekeeper be allowed to exclude people with pre-existing conditions? Should it be allowed to structure its services in ways that make sit more likely someone will go to the emergency room rather than undertake preventative measures? Should it be able to cap coverage?
All of these decisions will make a difference in the care Americans seek and receive, whether we’re talking self-insurance, single-payer insurance, employment-based insurance, or some combination thereof.
I’d also take issue with the idea that no American lacks health care. No American lacks EMERGENT care, but that’s a very small piece of a very large pie.
Mr. Goedde, I wasn’t talking about “us vs. them” as regards Democrats and Republicans. I was referring to people who had things they need (food, health care, drinkable water) and those who don’t.
It stands to reason that people who have jobs—or enough money not to need a job—are happy enough with their health care. I’m talking about my self-employed (Republican) uncle, who almost died of sepsis because he was so afraid he’d wind up bankrupt if he went to the hospital (my cousin broke into his apartment and called an ambulance); my friend—a Democrat, fired thanks to the recession—who is barely affording COBRA right now, has no job leads, and has just over a year to figure out whether or not he has to sell his house to insure his family of four; and my daughter, a cancer survivor, who will be completely uninsurable as an adult unless she works for a huge corporation.
I’m also talking about myself. Our insurance premiums have gone up exponentially in the last decade, and our coverage has decreased. If it continues this way, I don’t believe even your stat will hold: Not only will fewer people be able to afford quality insurance, but insurance itself will become more “basic.” So the excellent health care you and I hope to enjoy in our waning years may look very much like the British system…except for very rich Americans, who will be able to afford the best.
I simply don’t believe the rich are worth more, as humans, than everybody else.
Stacy, your thoughts are very admirable, and I think that it would be wonderful if there were no poverty in the world, and everyone had a roof over their head, food, and some type of medical care, etc. But unfortunately we live in the real world and not fantasy land. There always has been, and in my estimation, there always will be haves and have nots.
As I mentioned earlier, hard as you might try, you can never eliminate personal tragic stories regardless of what system you live under. I am also a cancer survivor, so I know some of the pitfalls. And having gone through that, I also know that the 5 year survival rate in the USA for my type of cancer is 99.6%, whereas in the UK the survival rate is 70%, and I attribute that to the difference in the quality of the care.
Sure, medical care and insurance are rising….what isn