Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Talking About Health Reform, But Not About A Cure
Health care reform is a vital and engaging concern for America - and for Americans.
But you would not know it from Thursday's White House Forum on Health Reform, which was so narrowly focused and uninspiring that it almost made Hillary Clinton's bumbling efforts of the 1990s look good.
President Obama sounded some of the right notes:
Now I know people are skeptical about whether Washington can bring about this change. Our inability to reform health care in the past is just one example of how special interests have had their way, and the public interest has fallen by the wayside. And I know people are afraid we'll draw the same old lines in the sand, give in to the same entrenched interests, and arrive back at the same stalemate we've been stuck in for decades.But I am here today because I believe that this time is different. This time, the call for reform is coming from the bottom up, from all across the spectrum - from doctors, nurses and patients; unions and businesses; hospitals, health care providers and community groups. It's coming from mayors, governors and legislatures - Democrats and Republicans - who are racing ahead of Washington to pass bold health care initiatives on their own. This time, there is no debate about whether all Americans should have quality, affordable health care -- the only question is, how?
Unfortunately, that is a mighty major "only question."
And the people who in the past have answered it wrong were in the room and at the table Thursday. Indeed, they were bragging about their successes in blocking past reform initiatives. "I don't see what happened in the '90s as a failure," Congressman Joe Barton, the Texas conservative who is the ranking Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, told a breakout session at Thursday's forum.
Barton was not an outlier.
The East Room at the White House was packed with the political players, union leaders and corporate lobbyists -- some of them good, many of them bad -- and a few administration-designated "Everyday Americans," who helped to illustrate the depth of the crisis that the insiders have allowed to metastasize over the past decade or so.
Only a handful of serious reformers got in the room.
Thanks to pressure from the Leadership Conference for Guaranteed Healthcare, Physicians for a National Health Program, Unions for Single Payer Health Care and the Progressive Democrats of America, an invitation was extended to House Judiciary Committee chair John Conyers, D-Michigan, the sponsor of H.R. 676, legislation that seeks to create a the single-payer insurance program that would take profiteering out of the health care system.
A few other real reformers were heard from -- including Californian Congressman Pete Stark.
And Dr. Oliver Fein, the director of Physicians for a National Health Plan was in the room.
But right before the doctor from Physicians for a National Health Plan on the White House list of "Community Leaders and Stakeholders Expected to Attend" were the CEOs of Pfizer and Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA).
And while the doctor was not included on any of the lists of breakout session speakers, the CEOs were, along with representatives of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, America's Health Insurance Plans, the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association and the Business Roundtable.
In other words, the overwhelming weight of opinion at what was supposed to be a wide-ranging discussion of health reform was -- at best -- on the side of tinkering with the existing for-profit system.
Change we can believe in was not on the agenda.
Who could have put it there?
Dr. Quentin Young, the Chicago physician who served as the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s personal physician and whose medical office once included a young Chicago activist named Barack Obama on its patient list, ought to be at the table. Here's Young discussing his support for single payer.
And where, on the lost list of members of Congress present, was the name of U.S. Rep. Tammy Baldwin? Elected to Congress as an outspoken advocate for single-payer health care, the Wisconsin Democrat is a member of the key committee in the House that deals with health care issues -- Energy and Commerce -- and she has succeeded in developing bipartisan coalitions that allow for state experimentation with various reform plans. In other words, she's a principled yet very practical player in the debate.
Baldwin should have been speaking.
So, too, should have been the working nurses of the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee (CNA/NNOC), the union that represents 85,000 RNs in all 50 states.
Ardent advocates for real reform, CNA/NNOC members correctly argue that: "Insurance-based reform will fail, and undermine public trust; only Medicare for All can achieve administration goals"
Here's what the nurses are saying:
While welcoming President Obama's call for achieving "comprehensive" healthcare reform this year, "a laudable commitment and a huge departure from the dismal healthcare policies of the past eight years," the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee warned that most of proposals floating around Congress would default on the promise and principles set by the administration."And, they would almost certainly fail to contain the rising costs that put so many families in peril or to repair our broken healthcare system," said CNA/NNOC Co-president Geri Jenkins, RN.
"That's the reason the majority of the nation's nurses and doctors -- the very people who have the most daily interaction with our healthcare system and see its failures and tragedies up front, favor a single-payer approach, or expanding Medicare to all."
"To achieve the lasting and cost-effective reform the president seeks and most Americans desire, we must confront the source of the present crisis -- an insurance industry that has been steadily pricing people out of access to care, or bankrupting them if they attempt to use it," Jenkins said. "Insurance company practices drive skyrocketing costs, a problem that won't be solved by more technology, electronic medical records, or any other stopgap measures some propose."
Jenkins welcomed the principles outlined by the administration for reform, and the call for progressive tax changes to help finance them, but warned that any reform "premised on expanding an insurance-based system will likely fail, frustrate the public desire for a real solution to our healthcare crisis, and undermine the political capital the administration has earned for reform."
"Private insurance plans aren't universal because they exclude people based on pre-existing conditions or age or anyone else they think will be expensive to cover. They don't guarantee choice of physician or hospital, but limit you to their network of providers.
"The insurers won't assure affordability because they are constantly raising premiums, deductibles, co-pays, and other fees to generate high revenues and profits. They can't guarantee safety and quality because they actively discourage the delivery of care or deny treatments, diagnoses, or referrals they don't want to pay for. And, they will never be fiscally responsible because there is no independent oversight, decisions are made in secret in closed boardrooms or CEO offices, and, their priority is profits, not care," Jenkins said.
"Medicare for all, however, does succeed in all eight areas. It removes the incentive for price gouging, and it takes control of our health away from the insurance companies, and puts it where it belongs, in the hands of patients, families, and their doctors and nurses," said Jenkins.
This reform, she added also promotes national recovery by creating 2.6 million new jobs, infusing $317 billion in new business and public revenues, and injecting $100 billion more in wages into the U.S. economy, according to a recent CNA/NNOC study.
HR 676, the U.S. National Health Care Act by Rep. John Conyers, is the plan that best meets the grand vision painted by our president. "We call on Congress and the administration to work with us to enact it," Jenkins said.
The point here is not to give up on the Obama administration as a vehicle for real reform.
White House forums of the sort that was held Thursday are "for the cameras" events that set the tone -- not the policy -- of an administration.
The president knows that single-payer is the right fix for what ails the American health care system.
He was once a reasonably consistent advocate for a single-payer system, appearing at events in Chicago organized by Dr. Young and Physicians for a National Health Care Plan.
As recently as last August, Obama told a health care forum in New Mexico that, "If I were designing a system from scratch, I would probably go ahead with a single-payer system."
The insurance industry and its allies don't want to start from scratch and make a system that works.
They want to keep patching up a system that doesn't work -- that fails to provide care to roughly 50 million Americans, that leaves another 50 million under-insured and that is defined more by its cost overruns than its quality -- so that they can keep profiteering.
Thursday's White House sessions provided a great forum for advocates of "patching up" and "tinkering" with a broken system.
But that's not the treatment that is needed. That's a prescription for failure.
Obama is better positioned that any president in decades -- perhaps ever -- to design a system from scratch.
The special interests, corporate insiders and congressional compromisers who made the mess and fear the change won't remind him of that fact - as Thursday's forum so amply illustrated.
Real reformers should keep banging on the doors and demanding a place at the table.
Single payer is not "an alternative."
It is not one of "various treatment options."
It is the cure.
- Posted in
26 Comments so far
Show AllI think Obama slapped a "States Secrets" claim on anyone wanting to discuss Single Payer.
Even though you NEVER hear anything about SP on radio or televison it's the most preferred plan.
Just imagine if SP advocates has access to the public airwaves to explain its benefits.
What I really want is this integrated health database that anyone in the government can access. Next time I'm the victim of a traffic stop, or harassed at the border or trying to get on an airplane, I really want the government thug to know I'm on schizophrenia medication. Or medical marijuana. Wouldn't we all be SAFER then, when a judge reads you're being treated for paranoia while you're trying to defend yourself against a fraudulent red light violation? Won't it be a perfect world when a border guard can see you told your psychologist that you believe America is a terrorism-sponsoring state, and that you told your doctor that you have unexplained migraines and blackouts?
I really want my confidential medical information shared with ALL the government filth!
Heard of the Patriot Act?
Too late.
That was one of the first things that turned me against Bush actually. But this is the PATRIOT Act with private medical details. How do you derail past bad legislation with current bad legislation? How come I never hear the word "liberty" on Common Dreams?
call in your support for single payer healthcare. PDA has an easy lookup and is encouraging a national call in
http://capwiz.com:80/pdamerica/callalert/index.tt?alertid=12846641&PROCESS=Call+Now
Nice, polite article. It takes the tone that Obama wants to help, and that congress might ignore the lobbyist and side with what is right for the citizens. Nice, but not likely.
I'm past nice. I've waited for decades for any sign that Washington will not deliver as faithfully to the insurance companies as they have to the banks. I'm past politically correct, pretending that I'm fine with immigrants both legal and not, poor people and veterans deserving care while I do not. And I will not happily add the retired of the UAW - or the benefits of any other corporation that wants to renege on their contracts- for me to be taxed to pay for care I do not have myself. I did not have a job that provided benefits, but I do not see why I should now pay for someone who did to have their COBRA subsidized. I'm going to say it plain, "Why should I pay for others to have health care that I do not have for myself?"
And don't give me some someday, some way, one of these days you'll have care too. I watched congress for decades now. They only take from me. They take to give to the rich, and they take to give a little back to a few of the poor. I will not now be told that in a few more decades, something promised will be given. That's what they said in the early 80s when they raised the Social Security tax to build up the surplus. Then the f**kers stole it. So, Obama and Congress can take their "down payment," their cash payback to all the CEOs in the room that write them checks, and cram it.
More and more single payer supporters -- including me -- are recognizing there is more than one way to get there. A huge lesson from past efforts is that the insurance industry can make people completely terrified of losing what they've got, no matter how limited that is. Fear makes people resist change and vote out of office anyone seen as limiting their choices. That's why the single payer bill isn't racking up lots of new supporters in Congress. What's different this time is that the plan the President and many others are pushing would expand and open the public programs we have all spent decades and billions building and that frankly keep most health providers afloat -- Medicare, public employee programs, children's health, etc. Expand benefits by incentivising prevention and wellness, and open the programs to all on a sliding scale basis. That way you keep what you have if you like it -- no threat and no fear -- or you sign up for the public plan if you want better benefits at lower cost with greater security. And at the same time, increase regulation on private insurers so they can't increase deceptive marketing and select the healthiest. Insurance companies HATE this -- they understand they cannot compete on the basis of quality. President Obama will need all our help to pass this agenda. That's why this single payer supporter is adding my voice and contacting my members of Congress again and again: I want to be able to choose a health plan that's efficient and focused on health -- before I turn 65.
I am a proponent of single payer health care, but unfortunately, as long as the insurance giants and big pharma control the crime family it will never happen, too many $$$ at stake. Case in point: Senator Baucus of Montana, was given around $ 200,000.00 by big pharma and is in their pocket, like so many others in Congress.
well...it has to come from americans themselves....if health care is a problem where it hits americans in a very real way -- financially and healthwise , security-wise, and in terms of endlessly worrying about insurance if they lose a job or are part-time workers .........
IT IS AMERICANS THEMSELVES that have to mobilize . if they spend so much time hanging on phones and e mail and letters and corresponding to complain about one thing or another and deal with their legal problems and daily problems and challenges --they can also spend the time and energy to
MAKE OBAMA and CONGRESS DO IT.
when Franklin Delano Roosevelt was president - and won on the basis of his platforms -- he said in his Inaugural:
:"FELLOW AMERICANS -- you have SPOKEN and sent me to the White House to do things...now...MAKE ME DO IT".
are americans so TIMID? great as the power of these corporations are -- even THEY are subject to the will of people if people will FORCE THEM to do things as people wish.
even the fact that the economy has tanked because of what corporations have done -- and consumers WON"T BUY -- the corporations can not FORCE americans to buy -- and americans even in a limited way are CHOOSING between bread for their children or a vacation. THAT is "MAKING THEM DO IT" , one way or another.
and even at that -- americans are INFLUENCING how corporations will behave simply because americans's decisions are now based on NEED --
HOW MUCH MORE if americans exercised their CHOICE and WILL when they DO have a CHOICE to MAKE the government do what they wish ---which is to REMOVE profitdriven motives from the health industry?
inspite of the "entrenched interests"
of corporations..........
AMERICANS HAVE POWER _- GREAT POWER -- they just aren;t using it PROPERLY for THEIR own good.
if americans showed that POWER together -- these corporations will FALL ON THEIR KNEES in abject suplication for any CRUMBS the american people will BOTHER to throw at their direction
AMERICANS do NOT KNOW their own TRUE POWER for GOOD , and that is
power for COMMON GOOD if they just sat back a few moments and decide to act on it.
But the problem is, the Medical Industrial Complex is so powerful and so good at propoganda. They have Americans believing that universal medicine is "socialism," which is inherently evil. Health care will be rationed. We'll have long waits. We won't be able to choose our own doctors. Most people I talk to believe in this line of nonsense, no matter how hard I try to educate them and refer them to credible sources with the truth. And it's also in spite of the fact that the majority of people I talk to aren't truly happy with the current system, complain about rising costs of their health insurance, etc.
"Change we can believe in was not on the agenda. Who could have put it there?"
Listen, Jesus himself could not "have put it there."
"The point here is not to give up on the Obama administration as a vehicle for real reform."
That's exactly not the point. The point is to stop waiting, pushing(whatever that means), expecting etc. for Obama to demand our rights for us.
As one commenter put it so well yesterday:
"The PNHP should have stayed out in the cold and continued their planned protest. Instead, the group was co-opted. Did they shell out the bucks to the Obama campaign? If not, then they don't have a real seat at the table."
I agree. I have much appreciation for the doctors at PNHP but I think they and some other single-payer advocates are making a BIG MISTAKE! by focusing so closely on getting Obama to see the light and support single-payer.
I think Obama gets it already--as you have previously noted--and he's just not going to do single-payer because it's not in his best political interests. Period.
Advocates for single-payer have to accept this and see Obama for what he is--a worthy adversary to single-payer and many other important reforms and policies.
And all the "pushing" from within won't bring meaningful change.
The task at hand now is to build an independent movement to the left of Obama as a countervailing force to "his best political interests" that's so glaringly missing in today's politics. Only within such a movement by the force of leverage will the prospects of single-payer have a chance.
That movement may initially be "out standing in the cold" but at least it will be a real vehicle for meaningful change by re-establishing a healthy political balance.
you are probably correct in this, both in assessment of where obama's "heart" really lies: in SINGLE PAYER...but that because of the political and economic climate of the united states -- he can just "mandate" things - nor even "disinvite" the industries - it is just the reality of things in washington...
but he HAS to be PUSHED - if necessary from "outside the loop" -- and in a BIG way that is UNRELENTING..that comes hand in hand with the increasing FAILURE of the status quo -- until the wave builds up so big --
both the disastrous for profit policies and the pressure for single payer -- that obama and congress will be forced to retrace.
AND the industries will be CORNERED as the "PERPETRATORS of a CRIME" and no longer "wanted" even in discussions.
but teddy, I really don't know or care where Obama's "heart" is--that's the point.
What matters is where his self-interest lies. And creating a independent countervailing force to act on that interest is what I'm talking about.
Teddy, forget about the "pushing" thing--whatever that is. It's all about demanding. All people have to do is get behind their own rights and DEMAND them.
All the better if people DEMAND their rights collectively.
"Change we can believe in was not on the agenda.
"Who could have put it there?" So Nichols asks. Ummm, let's see . . . Barack Obama? But he won't touch single-payer because that would mean we'd have to "start from scratch." And since we've had a massive and monumentally failed system for about a hundred years, there's no question of throwing all that out. We must preserve the GOOD parts, by pretending they exist. All this means is that Big Pharma and the "health" insurers are simply too damn big to ignore. They OWN the system, and we expect Obama to take it away from them? After they contributed immensely to his campaign? They own a big part of him as well. That's what this system is all about: who owns what and whom. In a democracy this wouldn't be the problem, but instead of that we have something better: the Grand Illusion of democracy.
Obama can either don a full body kevlar suit and go for single payer, or let the people decide to adopt single payer through a binding referendum that gets him off the hook.
That would leave his face for some well paid sharp-shooter. They managed to get Kennedy in the head. But Obama should at least be searching for a way to implement single payer, and if a binding referendum would work, lets get to it. I'd hate to be in Obama's shoes--he really doesn't stand much of a chance of going the distance, kevlar suit or not. No wonder his hair is turning grey after only a few months.
I notice that when it comes to gun rights, no problem, people rail for them like mad but when it comes to healthcare, silence or worse pro-corporate parroting. Sorry folks but until Congress fears its citizens on healthcare as they do on guns, forget it. Come up with a plan and let me know.
Terrance Mitchell
Redfield, South Dakota
you know, that's a really good point. Shouldn't we be able to get people as passionate and concerned about a basic human right as some are about gun rights?
Instead of worrying how to best appeal to Obama or wonder what's really in his heart--maybe the focus should be on our own hearts, are own convictions and what matters to us.
Have you talked to gun rights nuts? They are fanatics. We don't need more fanatics. But it would be nice if 'ordinary' people could get excited over an issue that effects every aspect of their lives.
Well, you make an even better point--people who love freedom should not be confused with fanatics.
I think our country has a long and important tradition of 'ordinary' people who truly and deeply love freedom. Nothing wrong with that--especially as you say--it's "an issue that effects every aspect of [our] lives."
I agree with those who say it is time to hit the streets. Obama has said that if the people put a single payer bill on his desk, he will sign it.
Single payer advocates need to recruit small business owners who can't insure their employees, often can't insure their own families. The Republicans claim to be the champions of small business owners. The latter need to ask Sen. Mitch McConnell "What have you done for us lately?"
Nothing would help business more than getting out from under escalating health care premiums. Just think of being a Canadian or French business--free of the annual "duke-it-out" with the HMOs.
I don't wish anyone an illness, but it may take a real-life encounter with our immoral system to convince voters to support single payer. Karen Tumulty of TIME magazine has just told such a tragic story about her brother.
Tell your stories! Send them to the President at www.whitehouse.gov
You'll see the CONTACT form on the web site.
Phone Sen. Max Baucus at (202) 224-2651. Tell him to cost out the savings under single payer. Call your own House representative, tell him/her to co-sponsor HR 676.
I love that not a single comment here seems to be against Single Payer. Can't wait personally, it was great when I lived in Germany, and I ended up needing a lot of medical care there...
Easiest legislation ever. Conyers probably could write it on a cocktail napkin. Write your congressperson!
Have done so. Don't think they will listen, but it's worth a try. I urge all readers to do the same. If you are lazy, there are e-mail routs to the president and your congressmen.
This question of health care and a single payer solution is, in my opinion, the most vital in our country. That it has even been brought up for discussion is a small step in the right direction. It's important that the greedy framers or our current system not be the only voices heard. So far, at least on the regular TV news that most people watch, single payer has never been heard of. The battle seems to be between the president's position of shoring up and expanding our current system with tons of money, and Republicans who say it would be too expensive. As it goes, I'm afraid Republicans are right. It's time someone was heard to say "scrap the whole mess and start with a system that does not need insurance companies, a system which is being used successfully in most of the first world". That would not be too expensive, in fact would save us all a mess of spending. The ONLY people who would loose with a single payer health system are the insurance company leeches.
Could an independent branch of government be established to coordinate a single payer health system? A fourth branch of the government.
We need to get beyond a representative form of governance which is too often influenced in their decision-making process.
We need a board of overseers which is elected directly by he people. We need a process where the people can select the best guidelines for the system.
We have the power of public forums and the internet to inform, educate and empower all citizens.
Do you really believe that your local representative will represent you? John Conyers is one of 435 representatives. Aside from Conyers and a handle of other representatives, I'd rather not have them messing with my health system.
Single payer health is more than a health system. We need to put more than a health system in place to achieve single payer health.
Why do we have to wait for the Federal gov? Maybe start with state-level single-payer? Higher state taxes, and probably still people from others states will move to it. OTOH, a few city councils did voice support for HR676. Only about 30 towns yet, last time I checked.
13 MILLION YOUNG AMERICANS -- who work --
are in limbo who don't qualify for insurance under their parents' plans...nor from work -- because
they're "too rich" for government insurance....and too poor to afford private insurance.
THIS is america? lol. always talking about "our youth?" "the FUTURE?"
working for the "american dream?"
they're already in a NIGHTMARE.
between the government that sets "disqualifications" - and business that sets "disqualifications"........
an entire nation's worth of population -- at least 50 MILLION ---
are "not eligible" ?
what kind of society is that? ....that goes around the world LECTURING nations about what a "civilized society" is?
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/07/young.uninsured/index.html