Here's an idea: look at the issues

A key to the success of a democracy is educated and reasoned positions by the electorate on important issues.

Judging by the reaction and, especially the tone, of recent "town hall meetings" on health care reform, one cannot be optimistic about the direction in which we are heading.

To best understand much of the uproar over the general reforms being proposed by President Obama, one must look to comments by U.S. Rep. Jim DeMint of South Carolina:

"If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will be his Waterloo," Sen. DeMint said. "It will break him."

With that in mind, we ask those who have watched the vitriolic and often threatening comments at the so-called town hall meetings to consider what is indeed paramount in this "debate" -- true concern over the direction of American health care policy or down and dirty politics? We more than suspect the latter.

We have been present for this type of "mob mentality" on more than one occasion over the years. For those who have not been there, let's just say it is not a pleasant sight. Reasonable discussion goes out the window early in the game and it becomes an ugly exercise in shouting down and insulting.

To hear some pronouncements, there is no inherent problem to begin with -- with Obama detractors repeatedly saying we simply have the best health care system in the world and implying very little change is needed.

We would counter through the words of Arkansas Democrat-Gazette letter-writer Patricia Phillips of Little Rock, who points to the "elephant in the room" represented by the 46 million Americans who have no health insurance. She noted this would be the equivalent of no one having health insurance in Alabama, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, Wyoming, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Colorado, Iowa and Kentucky. Wouldn't that suggest we have a problem.

"Surely we can realize that America does not have the best health care in the world," Ms. Phillips writes. "A system that is available only to those who can afford it is a system of extreme neglect. It is a system run as a business with huge profits for the insurance companies, not a system of compassionate care. We must address this problem now. Let's all try to be a part of the solution and end this shameful situation in our country."

Amazingly, we watch town hall shouters on television blasting the concept of "government-run health care," many of them clearly at an age in which they are Medicare recipients. Some have amazingly said they don't want the "government messing with our Medicare." It is statements like that which give pause to the concept of democracy itself.

A well-reasoned editorial in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram gave "both sides" of the health care reform issue and asked readers to become informed and constructive in their attitudes. "Reforming one-sixth of the U.S. economy is too important to get wrong," the editorial said. "The healthcare debate is tailor-made for demagogues."

The editorial makes a lot of clear -- and reasonable -- points concerning the issue, which is unusual in today's highly-charged atmosphere.

Among them is this observation -- "Healthcare economic principles do not operate like the rest of the economy, yet we act as if they do. Healthcare is supplier-driven: You generally do what your doctor recommends. Patients do not shop for the lowest-cost doctor, especially when they are sick and there is no easy way to find out what things cost. Consumer-driven healthcare advocates minimize these factors. For those with too little or no insurance, demand is driven by what's in their wallets. One final point: Unlike many consumer goods, more expensive health is not better healthcare; it only costs more."

We would encourage our readers to look objectively at the important issue of health reform in our society and try to help be a part of the solution. It is an issue which is far more important than which party -- or which president -- wins or loses in the political game.

--REK