The health-care industry unions and lobbying organizations are hardly the first special interest group to launch advertisements aimed to alarm viewers, but they seem to be taking the tactic to a new level this year.
Records released last week showed advertisements attacking Gov. Eliot Spitzer's budget proposal cost $4.5 million so far, and the figure is likely to wind up much greater. The Service Employees International Union Local 1199 and the Greater New York Hospital Association are opposing Spitzer's health care spending plan, which cuts more than $1.2 billion in aid for health-care facilities.
If you've been watching TV the last few weeks, you've probably seen the ads.
They blast Spitzer for picking on the hard-working nurses and other health-care workers, while they imply the governor is coddling HMOs and drug companies.
Spitzer has recently launched some of his own ads in response, paid with his leftover campaign funds (which is good, because taxpayer money shouldn't be used for political games such as this). Spitzer claims his plan reforms a system that overpays hospital executives and spends too much on misleading advertising.
Like most budget battles in Albany, the best approach falls somewhere between these two sides. Spitzer is right that the system has fat in many places, but he also needs to recognize that his proposed cuts are too large.
The hospitals and unions, on the other hand, need to come to the realization that the health-care industry in New York state is far too expensive, and they play a role in that situation.
New Yorkers would be best served if both sides of this argument would stop spending money on oversimplified television ads, and get together to come up with a reasonable solution.
If you've been watching TV the last few weeks, you've probably seen the ads.
They blast Spitzer for picking on the hard-working nurses and other health-care workers, while they imply the governor is coddling HMOs and drug companies.
Spitzer has recently launched some of his own ads in response, paid with his leftover campaign funds (which is good, because taxpayer money shouldn't be used for political games such as this). Spitzer claims his plan reforms a system that overpays hospital executives and spends too much on misleading advertising.
Like most budget battles in Albany, the best approach falls somewhere between these two sides. Spitzer is right that the system has fat in many places, but he also needs to recognize that his proposed cuts are too large.
The hospitals and unions, on the other hand, need to come to the realization that the health-care industry in New York state is far too expensive, and they play a role in that situation.
New Yorkers would be best served if both sides of this argument would stop spending money on oversimplified television ads, and get together to come up with a reasonable solution.
The Citizens' Say
There are 2 comment(s)
wonder twin wrote on Mar 19, 2007 6:23 PM:
Matt wrote on Mar 19, 2007 1:48 PM: