The fact there are so many at the protest underscores the fact forces campaigning against the bill are strong. People are worried about spending requirements added to already high deficits due to the economic recovery efforts. Those costs will be passed on to everyday folks meaning long lasting hefty requirements. That's real stuff.

There is another part to this and that's who are behind these movements. As for who is behind the government proposal it's mostly the same groups that have been pushing for heath care reform and tighter government regulations of the health care industry especially insurance companies like blue collar unions. Government regulation of private health care can be a great thing evidenced by European countries currently utilizing tight insurance company regulations.

American health care companies do take advantage of everyday citizens. People die every year due to corporate games like rejecting claims until it is too late. In some cases patients die as a result. This so insurance companies don't have to pay for expensive treatment. Good thing they are not in the morality business.

As with auto manufacturers lobbying for gas guzzlers, little regulation means less stopping them from pursuing such practices. My ex-girlfriend once worked in claims for an insurance giant. I won't name the company, but she told me point blank their job was to deny and keep denying. They were trained how best to put off and wear down clients.

The part of the protests I find dubious are the claims of government takeovers regarding heath care specifically. Sure after 9/11/01 there were unprecedented intrusions and expansions of government that drove so many to the ballot box for a change from the dark ages. That kind of change still needs to happen and hasn't, but this is different.

What is not discussed now are the exact points in the legislation that say government will "take care away from seniors" as some claims go or will "kick people off of good insurance plans and force them into worse ones" - also asserted. These among other vagaries seem geared towards stoking fears among policy holders like false political advertisements.

During interviews with attendees of the day after September 11th protests and excerpts from speeches show heath care becoming government intrusion as their central theme. People promoting it can't specify how that is the case. Thus, it seems unclear as to whether the claims are true or not. This should be addressed and broken down point by point on both sides. The president already started his part of this process. The other side has not yet.

Scary price tags aside, those for whom it would be the biggest intrusion don't really have to worry about coverage. They don't need to be concerned about premiums paid for, but claims denied due to a silly preexisting condition claim like "pimples" all of a sudden. Those who have something to lose here don't end up getting denied when for all the years they were healthy their money was good enough just being green and legal - pimples and all.

No, it is the corporation which will have to pay. The new regulations favor patients for sure. I noticed at the bottom of the websites which are supposed to be strictly "grassroots" "non-profit" movements there are icons of numerous organizations.

A little bit of digging and one quickly comes up with names of lobbying groups and groups with strong ties to interests that all link back to the health care industry. That makes it seem very obvious why specifics about how the government will be "intruding" are not discussed and incendiary words like "socialism" are thrown about as distractions. As the proposal stands, outside of an added federal price tag, ordinary folks don't really have anything to lose by strict regulations on the companies. Those currently benefiting by higher profit margins do.

It starts to make sense why claims of Marxism and the like are tossed about like hand grenades. Corporations are throwing money at a problem they don't want to see grow. It's funny how the same people fight the public tooth and nail and try and manipulate us at every turn to loosen restrictions. This so they don't have to be accountable, and can squeeze as much money out of us as possible. Anything less is "Marxism."

Okay. But, when they make poor investments, excessive lobbying comes back to bite them in the butt and they are in jeopardy of going out of business they ask us to bail them out.

Good old government funds and partial takeovers. What's more interesting here is they've manipulated the very same demographic so adamantly against pouring money into banks, insurance companies and auto companies earlier. They have enlisted their help to get them less regulation enabling them to take more advantage of ordinary folks.

Regulation of the health care industry may or may not decrease private insurance companies' bottom lines by a few million but that's a drop in the bucket for them. For ordinary folks it means better care and less insurance manipulation. For average Americans it's actually a win win - so long as the figures work out. More money added to the deficit is not good. Insurance companies being forced to pay what they are supposed to and not being able to deny treatment by using insulting excuses? That's as close to brass rings as it gets for average Joes.

This is the kick off of the next election season. Already we are seeing some similar themes. For corporate America to be attempting to trick those who were so upset with them for their previous recklessness and arrogance, in part due to their success in lobbying for deregulation, now convincing their most ardent critics to fill body space at their rallies is new. It does not surprise me, it does make me reflect.

For this election season exposing the names of the companies and how they are tied to the health insurance industry would be a good thing for those center left. Showing how they are as much grass roots focused as Coke and Pepsi sponsoring movements against curbing soft drink sales in schools could be enlightening.

For those ordinary truly grass roots folks against the health care package it might be smart to cut away from these interests Show the world they have a real movement. Otherwise they risk looking like corporate stooges at a time when the right can ill afford losing blue collar credibility. The health care industry employs millions of people and provides large University endowments and scholarships. There's nothing wrong with healthy profits, but average Joes don't want to be tricked solely so corporate America can suck up a few more of our treats.

To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com.