by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright December 12, 1999
All Rights Reserved.

hen the Los Angeles Times reported that Bill Bradley earned nearly 3 million dollars for 'speaking fees' from The American Association of Health Plans—and other Wall Street money machines—since retiring from the U.S. senate in 1996, eyebrows began to raise. Yet Bradley continues to grandstand about campaign finance reform, but never offers any explanation for how his 65 billion dollar health plan is closely tied to his work for the HMO industry. Why is it OK to accept a direct salary from the HMO’s main lobbying organization but it’s not OK to accept campaign contributions from its political action committees (PACs)? Where’s there more under-the-table influence: Being directly on the payroll or accepting campaign contributions? Most people know that full-time employment exerts far greater influence, especially when this fact remains hidden.

       Holding town-hall meetings on national television with Republican presidential candidate John McCain makes great campaign publicity, but can’t ignore how Bradley’s 'former' employer influences his current plans. There’s no way to pretend that Bradley’s loyalty to The American Association of Health Plans hasn’t influenced his thinking. Now comes even more smoke about Bradley’s own personal health. Detouring off the campaign trail, Bradley made a pit stop in California at a bay area hospital to undergo the draconian medical procedure known as electrocardioversion. Bradley’s own physician, Dr. Robert H. Heissenbuttel of Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center in New York City, admitted that Bradley underwent electrocardioversion to treat atrial fibrillation in 1996, and then two more times since due to cardiac 'arrhythmias,' the euphemism applied to serious electroconductive heart problems.

       You can’t hide from the truth: Bradley’s condition isn’t the simple arrhythmia suffered by an estimated two million Americans. They don’t require electrocardioversion to restore the heart’s normal beat. Suggesting that Bradley forgot to take his medication and wound up requiring electrocardioversion makes absolutely no sense. According to The Merck Manual (1999) and Conn’s Current Therapy (1999), most patients suffering from mild atrial fibrillation return to normal heart [sinus] rhythms on their own or with the help of common beta blocker medications like Procan [procainamide]. When the heart doesn’t convert back to a normal rhythm on its own or with medication, then electrocardioversion is indicated. But it’s also recommended that patients receiving electrocardioversion undergo anticoagulant treatment to reduce chances of embolism [traveling blood clots]—a potentially fatal side-effect. And when arrhythmias can’t be managed with medications or electrocardioversion, then pace-makers are commonly recommended.

       Let there be no mistake, electrocardioversion is a serious procedure, just short of utilizing pace-makers. Referring to Bradley’s condition, "Thus, this rhythm does not interfere with your ability to function," wrote Dr. Heissenbuttel, proving that even physicians excel as spin doctors. If the candidate cancels campaign appearances, requires hospitalization, and undergoes electrocardioversion, that clearly interferes with his functioning. Can physicians, attorneys, construction workers, and, yes, presidents perform their jobs with serious atrial fibrillation? Only to a point. When the condition gets too bad, it requires more draconian steps, including stronger medications, hospitalization, and electrocardioversion to restore normal heart functioning.

       Proclaiming that Bradley’s blood pressure, pulse rate, and cholesterol levels were normal, doesn’t in any way erase the severity of his problem with atrial fibrillation. Let’s face it, this isn’t good news and puts any campaign into the damage control mode. "He’s in excellent health," said Anita Dunn, Bradley’s communication director. Surely most people know that people in 'excellent' health don’t suffer from recurrent bouts of atrial fibrillation requiring life-preserving medical procedures like electrocardioversion. How much reality has to be bent now to preserve Bradley’s campaign? What about his survival? Surely, the strenuous pace of campaigning, fatigue, exhaustion and, yes, stress can’t be indicated for a person with this condition.

       "No. It will have no impact whatsoever. This is just one of those things. It’s there. You have to live with it. It’s no problem whatsoever," said Bill Bradley, defending his physical fitness to remain in the race. "The campaign is invigorating for me. My energy level is more than adequate. Anybody that’s been campaigning with me for the last year would know that we run a very full schedule," remarked Bradley. But how much of Bradley’s stressful routine contributes to his current bout of atrial fibrillation? It’s anyone’s guess. Most physicians encourage heart patients to carefully monitor their activity and stress levels. While it’s commendable that Sen. Bradley shows spunk and a stiff upper lip, camouflaging his condition does little good for him or the American people. Why is this the first time we’ve heard about Bradley’s heart condition? Physical and mental fitness are prerequisites for holding the nation’s most demanding job.

       Regardless of the impact Bradley’s condition has on his candidacy, it’s important for the Bradley camp to level with the American people. Minimizing his medical problems only makes matters worse by breeding distrust with prospective voters. Dismissing his condition as the common arrhythmias suffered by millions of Americans ignores the inescapable fact that Sen. Bradley had to undergo electrocardioversion to fix the problem—four times in the last 3 years. Atrial fibrillation is no lightweight matter. While Bradley says his condition gives him no anxiety, that doesn’t make it any less frightening to have your heart beat out of control. Suggesting that this condition has no impact on Bradley’s routine completely sidesteps the reality of this disorder. Now that Bradley’s made this reluctant disclosure, it’s time to stop blowing smoke and let voters make up their own minds.

About the Author

John M. Curtis is editor of OnlineColumnist.com. He’s also the director of a West Los Angeles think tank specializing in human behavior, health care and political research and media consultation. He’s a seminar trainer, columnist and author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2000 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.