Green shoots, bail-outs, public options, oh my.
As Josh Marshall of TPM observes today, it's hard even for him to remember what we mean by a "public option":
But I don't feel like I'm hearing from the White House any clear narrative, any clear and digestible argument for why this is necessary. I hear the phrase 'public plan'. But it's such a blah-blah gobbledegook phrase that even though I'm fairly deep into the policy details of this debate, half the time even I find myself forgetting exactly what that even means.
Source
When I hear people talking about green shoots, I sometimes forget we're not talking about spring (winter is, after all, waiting around the corner). I recently showed my wife a neat clip that visualizes one trillion dollars. Ironically, despite the clip's purpose being to clarify an overly bandied-about term without tangible meaning (the number one trillion), the clip confused my wife. Why? She doesn't really follow politics, and didn't really know what was meant by "bailout." Is this money we'd already spent? Were going to spend? Was the clip for it, or against it?
In some cases, overly relying on jargon obscures the meaning of what we're talking about ("public option," "bailout"). After all, neither of these things is as simple as those terms suggest, and in fact, neither actually has a tangible form at all -- both are like brewing storms. We use the terms -- hell, with the public option we rally behind or against them -- because they're convenient, and to some extent because we're lazy.
Other terms, like "green shoots," aren't confusing, but when a metaphor is overused, people tune out. Articles that mention "green shoots" have become nauseating for the same reason that cable news is nauseating.
What's the solution? From a rhetorical standpoint, use better descriptive language. For example, instead of talking about sub-prime mortgages, say "housing loans were made to people who didn't have the money to pay them back," or at least "bad loans." Even if this language isn't 100% accurate, it speaks to people who don't follow the financial crisis, because they find that kind of crap boring.
And stop using "public option" as much as possible. MANY PEOPLE DO NOT EVEN KNOW THIS HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH HEALTH CARE. SERIOUSLY. Nor does it sound like the radical thing it is. An Option? That's public? Say what it is you actually want: "affordable health care for everyone, regardless of their income or medical record."
The very worst thing about jargon is how quickly politicians misappropriate it. One day they oppose your "public option," and the next day they give it to you... only it's not what you meant in the first place. But it is public, and it is optional.
It may seem inconvenient to spell out what you mean over and over, but I guarantee that many on this board have entire jargon-filled discussions without knowing what they're talking about. Even those who do know what they're talking about could benefit from using more concrete terms so that we, as a community, can better evaluate where we stand.