The History of Medicare and
The Current Debate

The Birth of Medicare The Heritage Foundation Media Campaign Leading Market-Driven Legislative Proposal Instability in the Medicare HMO Marketplace The New Medicare Law: A Victory for the Proponents of Privatization Growing Power of Extremist Think Tanks MRC's Media Education Campaign

The Growing Power of Extremist Think Tanks

Heritage's aggressive campaign to privatize Medicare is part of a broader movement it is leading among extremist think tanks to control the course of public debate on various critical policy topics. With funds that are provided by certain private industry groups, these think tanks have been able to transform themselves into sophisticated propaganda machines that transform ideology into mainstream ideas. Since the so-called Republican revolution in Congress in 1994, these groups have been very successful at bringing attention to their agenda and shaping national discussion.

In its role as the de facto research arm of its political allies, Heritage has managed to push its ideas for school vouchers, charter schools and mandatory testing to the forefront of the education reform debate by arming similarly minded members of Congress with extremist economic analyses of every key piece of legislation. It has also convinced many key members of Congress and the White House that increased funding of targeted community-based organizations is the answer to welfare reform. Citizens for a Sound Economy (CSE), which receives around $1 million a year from a family that owns an energy conglomerate, has joined the battle against the Kyoto treaty, helped lead the fight against anti-trust enforcement, and has launched a number of anti-regulatory campaigns in the areas of liability law, technology, and health care.¹ In the mid-1990s, with funding from drug, biotechnology, and medical device companies, the Progress and Freedom Foundation orchestrated an unprecedented campaign aimed at weakening the powers of the Federal Drug Administration.²

Because of their extensive fundraising, lobbying, policy analysis, public relations and grassroots mobilization operations, these extremist think tanks are able to affect public sentiment and legislation in ways that comparatively poorly funded nonpartisan groups have never been able to. They have operatives on Capitol Hill who are in constant contact with key legislators and staff members in Congress, organize briefings for Congressional officials, and often hand deliver their publications to Republican leaders. They have panels of policy experts who regularly issue reports which provide data and analysis supporting their ideas and, as a result, legitimizing them in the minds of reporters, policy makers, and the public. They have state operations geared towards mobilizing Americans on their issues, giving their agenda a human face and voice.³

And this movement has showed no signs of slowing down. In fact, the number of state-based extremist policy groups, such as the Heartland Institute in Chicago and the Commonwealth Foundation for Public Policy Alternatives in Pennsylvania, is proliferating. Many of these groups explicitly pattern their operations after Heritage, producing simple, targeted messages and focusing much of their efforts on marketing these messages.⁴

Until recently with the founding of the Center for American Progress, groups that oppose the agenda of these extremist think tanks in different policy areas and want to open up public debate, have been reluctant to engage in an active war of ideas. Intimidated by the funding, Capitol Hill connections, and advanced communications operations of organizations like Heritage, these groups have not thought they could provide an effective counter–allowing extremist policy groups to spread their influence over the media, the legislative community, and the public unchecked.

_________________________________

¹ Callahan, David, "$1 Billion for Conservative Ideas," The Nation, April 26, 1999.
² Ibid.
³ Ibid.
⁴ Ibid.

Next →

 

_________________________________