Reply #58: California's Proposition 186 (1994) was an excellent example

[iverglas]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8764388

Proposition 186 was an initiative on the November 1994 California ballot which proposed to establish a state single-payer health care program. Although Prop 186 was overwhelmingly defeated in the November 1994 election (73% No, 27% Yes), it accomplished many things. Model legislation was developed showing the feasibility of a specific single-payer program for California. It was placed on the ballot by an unprecedented volunteer signature-gathering effort and was the largest grassroots political campaign fund-raising effort in California history. A novel strategy for the discussion of complex issues through 1500 house parties was launched. Prop 186 was defeated by an insurance industry-led coalition with an anti-government message. Lessons for future efforts include increasing the size and duration of the grassroots organizing and educational effort, and decreasing reliance on conventional political campaign tactics and the mainstream media.

When the insurance companies poured their millions into the state to defeat the proposition, what was the issue used by the groups they also funded?

Abortion.

Of course.

http://articles.latimes.com/1994-08-24/local/me-30441_1_california-health-insurance

Yet, despite its importance, Proposition 186 has received scant press coverage. Unless that changes substantially and soon, voters will be left at the mercy of sound bites and unreliable advertising. Hardly the best way to make a decision with severe financial and health implications for us all.

... Opponents argue that Proposition 186 is too good to be true. Proponents say that they are biased, and cite official disclosure reports revealing that 92% of their funding comes from the same health-insurance lobby that is spending so heavily to block reform in Washington.

You do not win by letting the opposition occupy the field and spread its false message about you everywhere.

If people want something, as people obviously do in the case of firearms control, then offer it to them and call the opposition what it is: well-funded lies from wealthy special interest groups that don't give a crap about the public and its interests.