A lot of people in the progressive blogosphere are shocked by the passionate disagreements going on over the uncertain fate of health care reform. I for one am not. We are dealing with an issue that will very much affect every single one of us, so people are going to take a much deeper look at the legislation than usual.

Add to that the very different effects it will have on people and the issue gets that much more confusing. A lot has focused on the average family of four living 250% above the poverty line, but what about that family living at 150% or 100% or even 350%? What about the single people out there at varying levels of income.

We’re all bloggers and all very opinionated, and that is a great thing for our democracy. I would never try to push my views of the bill on someone who opposes it, nor would I question their intentions. That restraint is something we haven’t seen to much of.

What I do have a big problem with is some of the dishonesty coming out of the debate. Rather it be intentional or through a casual omission of facts, the point remains that this is a very bad thing.

I really hate singling people out, but in this case I will – one on each side of the debate.

First we have Ezra Klein. Yesterday Ezra wrote a post saying:

And there are, to be sure, some differences. The public option did not survive the Senate. The individual mandate, which Obama campaigned against, was added after key members of Congress and the administration realized that the plan wouldn’t function in its absence. Drug reimportation was defeated, and a vague effort to have government pick up some catastrophic costs was never really mentioned.

And the summed it up with this:

But whether you love the Senate bill or loathe it, whether you’re impressed by Obama’s effort or disappointed, it is very hard to argue that the bill Congress looks likely to pass is fundamentally different from the approach Obama initially advocated.

What candidate Obama campaigned on and what is being delivered are the same to the point we can call them health care legislation, but in reality there are many differences that Marcy Wheeler pointed out yesterday. Big differences like the lack of a public option. To try and sell what we are seeing emerge from the Senate as being what Obama campaigned on is very dishonest.

Then on the other side of the argument we have Jane Hamsher. Yesterday Jane published a list of 10 reasons to kill the bill. She has some very good points in there, but then some that she fails to present the facts on:

Allows insurance companies to charge people who are older 300% more than others.

While her point is true it omits the fact that under the current system seniors pay up to 1100% more than others. Again – omissions like this lead us to a dishonest debate.

I only write this in hopes to try and urge everyone to take a step back and present their sides honestly and with all the facts. From their we can let our readers decide. After all, they are reading our blogs so they must be smart! But to twist the facts either intentionally or through omission, is the same level of dishonesty we saw back in August with the townhalls. Back then the progressive blogosphere was united against such practices, and I can only hope the same happens again today.

Finally I would like to add that a lot of people are thinking this could be the end of the progressive blogosphere. Nothing could be further from the truth. As I said at the beginning, having a progressive blogosphere that can disagree and present their arguements truthfully is a very good thing for our democracy. We’re Democrats and aren’t supposed to be in lock step 100% of the time. If we did that then we would end up being Republicans. Also it wasn’t that long ago we had another issue that divided the progressive blogosphere even more – Hillary –vs- Obama. We all survived that with minimal bruises and we too will survive this.

So argue on, but please argue on while being honest and presenting all the facts.