March, 04 2020, 11:00pm EDT

To Understand America's Broken Health Care System, Look at Colorado
WASHINGTON
The Effects of Hospital Consolidation in Colorado, a report by Jared Gaby-Biegel, published today by the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), can easily be the stand-in for what is broken in America's health care system. What is clear from this report is the damage done by hospital consolidation and the cascading harm that follows - to health care insurers, patients, and communities.
The report shows how hospital consolidation leads to soaring charges for services that, in turn, push insurers to either consolidate or drop out. Patients are stuck -- either in a health insurance desert, or with an insurance deductible so high they can't afford to use it. Meanwhile, hospitals have split into the have and have-nots. Urban and wealthy suburban hospitals, even so-called nonprofit hospitals, rake in the profits, while rural hospitals teeter on the edge of financial insecurity.
"The incentives of all the players in the system are pointed away from quality, accessible, and affordable health care for all," said CEPR's Gaby-Biegel, who researched and wrote the report. "It is obvious from this report that simply tweaking the system is not enough."
Notable findings from The Effects of Hospital Consolidation in Colorado are:
- The hospital consolidation trends and effects in Colorado are found more broadly in the US, suggesting there are important lessons to be learned from Colorado when policymakers and advocates are crafting future health care reforms.
- Colorado has seen the number of hospitals that are part of a chain grow from 26 in 2009 to 43 in 2019, according to the Cost Shift Analysis. This means that just over half of the 83 hospitals in Colorado are now in hospital systems.
- Consolidation led to increased prices, but not increased patient care. In Colorado, prices grew 71.3 percent from 2009 to 2018 compared to the growth of patient visits, which only grew 16.6 percent during the same period.
- Total statewide hospital profits in Colorado have increased 280 percent since 2009, with profit-per-patient increasing from $538 in 2009 to $1,518 in 2018.
- Since 2009, the number of uninsured Coloradans has decreased by 50 percent, freeing hospitals of $385 million in bad debt. Yet, private insurers saw hospital charges increase to 269 percent of what Medicare would pay, on average, for the same care.
- To fight back, private insurers consolidate, raise deductibles, or drop out of the market. Currently there is no health insurance market in the state that is considered competitive.
- Rural health insurance deserts mean 56 percent of families in rural southern Colorado, who are not enrolled in Medicaid, cannot afford an average bronze plan deductible of $5,798 spread out over three months.
The Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR) was established in 1999 to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people's lives. In order for citizens to effectively exercise their voices in a democracy, they should be informed about the problems and choices that they face. CEPR is committed to presenting issues in an accurate and understandable manner, so that the public is better prepared to choose among the various policy options.
(202) 293-5380LATEST NEWS
UN Urges Global Cooperation as Quarter of Humanity Lacks Safe Drinking Water
"Water is our common future and we need to act together to share it equitably and manage it sustainably," said the director-general of UNESCO.
Mar 22, 2023
Amid a lack of global cooperation, the world is far off-track in achieving universal access to clean drinking water by 2030, according to a United Nations report released Wednesday as officials marked World Water Day.
TheUnited Nations World Water Development Report 2023 was released by the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) as global leaders convened in New York for the first international conference on water in nearly half a century.
With seven years to go until the end of the decade, 26% of the world population lacks access to safe drinking water and 46% don't have access to basic sanitation, the report found.
The persistent scarcity of potable water is being driven by a rapid increase in water use in recent decades, with usage growing by 1% per year in the last 40 years due to "a combination of population growth, socioeconomic development, and changing consumption patterns," including within the agriculture industry. Yearly water use growth is expected to continue at this rate until at least 2050.
In some of the most affected areas of the globe, progress on closing the water access gap and meeting this aspect of the U.N.'s sixth Sustainable Development goal would need to quadruple.
"Water is our common future and we need to act together to share it equitably and manage it sustainably," said Audrey Azoulay, director-general of UNESCO. "As the world convenes for the first major United Nations conference on water in the last half century, we have a responsibility to plot a collective course ensuring water and sanitation for all."
In addition to water use, UNESCO reported, "the acceleration and spreading of freshwater pollution"—the biggest source of which is untreated wastewater—and the climate crisis have helped to make water scarcity "endemic," particularly in middle- and lower-income countries.
"As a result of climate change, seasonal water scarcity will increase in regions where it is currently abundant—such as Central Africa, East Asia and parts of South America—and worsen in regions where water is already in short supply, such as the Middle East and the Sahel in Africa," reads the report. "On average, 10% of the global population lives in countries with high or critical water stress."
In a separate news report, Al Jazeeraprovided a visualization of water stress across the Middle East, showing how countries including Algeria, Egypt, and Sudan are "either extracting unsustainably from existing aquifer sources or relying heavily on desalination," and how rising temperatures, increased demand, and the construction of dams has shrunk a number of lakes across the region.
The UNESCO report emphasizes that global partnerships and cooperation are crucial to ensuring universal access to safe drinking water and sanitation by 2030, which Richard Connor, editor-in-chief of the report, told the Associated Press would require an investment of $600 billion to $1 trillion per year.
At the U.N. Water Conference, taking place from Wednesday through Friday, representatives from dozens of countries and international organizations focused on Indigenous rights, public health, and the climate are expected to speak about the solutions addressed in the report, including:
- The reallocation of water from agriculture to urban centers, which has "become a common strategy to meet freshwater needs in growing cities";
- Watershed protection, which can provide biodiversity conservation as well as jobs and training opportunities;
- Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) initiatives such as water operators' partnerships, which "connect established, well-functioning utilities with others that need assistance or guidance";
- Initiatives that allow the "meaningful" participation of beneficiaries, especially in rural areas; and
- Coordination between climate and water agendas, with policymakers proactively reaching out to climate stakeholders and vice versa.
"Accelerating action through partnerships and cooperation between water and climate stakeholders can create additional benefits to freshwater ecosystems and to the most exposed and vulnerable people, reducing disaster risks, delivering cost savings, fostering job creation and generating economic opportunities," reads the report.
"Safeguarding water, food, and energy security through sustainable water management, providing water supply and sanitation services to all, supporting human health and livelihoods, mitigating the impacts of climate change and extreme events, and sustaining and restoring ecosystems and the valuable services they provide, are all pieces of a great and complex puzzle," it continues. "Only through partnerships and cooperation can the pieces come together. And everyone has a role to play."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Seymour Hersh Accuses US of 'Cover Up' Over Nord Stream Sabotage
The veteran investigative journalist alleged that Biden administration officials have been "feeding" the press false stories to "protect a president who made an unwise decision and is now lying about it."
Mar 22, 2023
In a follow-up to his explosive story accusing U.S. President Joe Biden of ordering the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines, veteran U.S. journalist Seymour Hersh charged Wednesday that the White House—in collaboration with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz—is attempting a "cover-up of its operation" by "feeding" false alternative narratives to the press, most prominently The New York Times.
Hersh's initial reporting, which was based on anonymous sourcing, was quickly dismissed by the Biden administration, with State Department Spokesperson Ned Price calling the detailed February account "false" and suggesting that those who believe its version of events are "naive" and "gullible."
Hersh, who famously exposed U.S. forces' massacre of Vietnamese civilians in My Lai and the torture of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, forcefully hit back at the Biden administration on Wednesday and criticized the American press for failing to push the White House on the September attack, which has major geopolitical implications.
"Press aides for the White House and Central Intelligence Agency have consistently denied that America was responsible for exploding the pipelines, and those pro forma denials were more than enough for the White House press corps," Hersh wrote on his Substack.
"There is no evidence that any reporter assigned there has yet to ask the White House press secretary whether Biden had done what any serious leader would do: formally 'task' the American intelligence community to conduct a deep investigation, with all of its assets, and find out just who had done the deed in the Baltic Sea," the journalist continued. "According to a source within the intelligence community, the president has not done so, nor will he. Why not? Because he knows the answer."
Officials from Norway, Germany, and Sweden told the United Nations last month that they are still investigating the explosions that severely damaged the Nord Stream pipelines, setting off an environmental nightmare and immediate speculation as to who was responsible. Such speculation is ongoing, with both official and unofficial probes attempting to determine the perpetrator.
The Nord Stream 2 pipeline—which Biden vocally opposed—never became operational, as the German government put it on hold just ahead of Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
During a press briefing late last month, Price said the U.S. "is not a party to this investigation because there are countries on whose sovereign territory this attack occurred, and we're deferring it to them to conduct this investigation."
On March 7, nearly a month after Hersh published his report, The New York Timesran a story—also based on anonymous sourcing—alleging that "new intelligence reviewed by U.S. officials" indicates "a pro-Ukrainian group carried out the attack on the Nord Stream pipelines last year."
The Ukrainian government has
denied any involvement in the attack.
"U.S. officials said there was much they did not know about the perpetrators and their affiliations," notes the Times report, which makes brief mention of Hersh's story and quotes unnamed U.S. officials denying any Biden administration involvement.
"The disinformation professionals inside the CIA understand that a propaganda gambit can only work if those on receiving are desperate for a story that can diminish or displace an unwanted truth."
The same day as the Times published its story, the German weekly newspaper Die Zeit ran a report alleging that German investigators "succeeded in identifying the boat that was allegedly used for the secret operation" to sabotage the Nord Stream pipelines.
"It is said to be a yacht rented from a company based in Poland, apparently owned by two Ukrainians," Die Zeit reported. "According to the investigation, the secret operation at sea was carried out by a team of six people. It is said to have been five men and one woman."
In his Wednesday piece, Hersh contended that the message of the Times and Die Zeit stories—both of which emphasized that much of the sabotage operation remains shrouded in mystery—"was that the press and the public should stop asking questions and let the investigators unravel the truth."
"Holger Stark, the author of the report in Die Zeit, went a step further and noted that there were some 'in international security services' who had not excluded the possibility that the yacht story 'was a false flag operation.' Indeed, it was," Hersh alleged, citing an anonymous source inside the U.S. intelligence community.
That source told Hersh that the yacht narrative reported by Die Zeit "was a total fabrication by American intelligence that was passed along to the Germans, and aimed at discrediting your story."
Hersh went on to add that "the disinformation professionals inside the CIA understand that a propaganda gambit can only work if those on receiving are desperate for a story that can diminish or displace an unwanted truth."
"And the truth in question is that President Joe Biden authorized the destruction of the pipelines and will have a difficult time explaining away his action as Germany and its Western European neighbors suffer as businesses are shuttered amid high day-to-day energy costs," wrote Hersh, citing an energy expert who argued that the damage to the Nord Stream pipelines "led to a further surge of natural gas prices."
According to Hersh, the "most telling evidence" of the "weakness" of the Times reporting can be found in a podcast interview featuring Julian Barnes, one of three reporters whose bylines appeared on the March 7 story.
Barnes told podcast host Michael Barbaro that "we know really very little" about the pro-Ukrainian group that the Times reporting alleges may have been behind the Nord Stream attack.
"This group remains mysterious," Barnes said. "And it remains mysterious not just to us, but also to the U.S. government officials that we have spoken to. They know that the people involved were either Ukrainian, or Russian, or a mix. They know that they are not affiliated with the Ukrainian government. But they know they’re also anti-Putin and pro-Ukraine."
In response, Hersh wrote that "the Times reporters in Washington were at the mercy of White House officials 'who had access to intelligence.'"
"But the information they received," he added, "originated with a group of CIA experts in deception and propaganda whose mission was to feed the newspaper a cover story—and to protect a president who made an unwise decision and is now lying about it."
Hersh also alleged that while it remains an "open question" whether Scholz was aware of the planned pipeline sabotage in advance, the German leader has "clearly been complicit since last fall in support of the Biden Administration’s cover-up of its operation in the Baltic Sea."
Hersh wrote:
In early March, President Biden hosted German Chancellor Olaf Scholz in Washington. The trip included only two public events—a brief pro forma exchange of compliments between Biden and Scholz before the White House press corps, with no questions allowed; and a CNN interview with Scholz by Fareed Zakaria, who did not touch on the pipeline allegations. The chancellor had flown to Washington with no members of the German press on board, no formal dinner scheduled, and the two world leaders were not slated to conduct a press conference, as routinely happens at such high-profile meetings. Instead, it was later reported that Biden and Scholz had an 80-minute meeting, with no aides present for much of the time.
Citing an anonymous official with "access to diplomatic intelligence," Hersh wrote that "certain elements in the Central Intelligence Agency were asked to prepare a cover story in collaboration with German intelligence that would provide the American and German press with an alternative version for the destruction of Nord Stream 2."
"In the words of the intelligence community," Hersh continued, "the agency was 'to pulse the system' in an effort to discount the claim that Biden had ordered the pipelines' destruction."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'We Are Starbucks': Workers Strike Nationwide Ahead of Shareholder Meeting
"Instead of celebrating the law-breaking former CEO hell-bent on silencing us, Starbucks should respect our right to organize and meet us at the bargaining table," said one Seattle barista and member of Starbucks Workers United.
Mar 22, 2023
Amid an ongoing unionization wave, Starbucks workers across the United States are holding a national day of action on Wednesday to demand a living wage, consistent scheduling, safe working conditions, and the right to organize free from fear and intimidation.
Baristas plan to strike at more than 100 of the coffee giant's shops from coast to coast, including at cafes in Seattle, New York, Los Angeles, Memphis, and other cities. In Seattle, where Starbucks was founded and is headquartered, a major protest is planned—one day before shareholders vote on an assessment of workers' rights at the corporation's annual meeting.
At 12:00 pm PT, workers will march outside Starbucks' headquarters, declaring that the company's illegal union-busting won't stop their fight for higher wages, better benefits, and democratic workplaces.
Since December 2021, when baristas in Buffalo made history by forming the first unionized Starbucks in the U.S., more than 7,500 workers at over 280 of the coffee chain's locations nationwide have voted to unionize. Organizers have won more than 80% of their campaigns despite the company's unlawful intimidation and retaliation tactics.
According to Starbucks Workers United:
In this same time period, the NLRB's [National Labor Relations Board] regional offices have issued more than 80 official complaints against Starbucks, prosecuting the company for over 1,400 specific alleged violations of federal labor law, including accusations that former CEO Howard Schultz personally threatened a worker who expressed support for organizing.
To date, NLRB administrative law judges have issued nine decisions, eight of which collectively found that the company has committed 130 violations, including illegally monitoring and firing organizers, calling the police on workers, and outright closing a store that recently attempted to organize.
Due to Starbucks' refusal to bargain in good faith, none of the locations that voted to unionize have reached a contract agreement.
With his unlawful crackdown on organizing coming under increased scrutiny, Schultz moved up his resignation from April 1 to March 20. Schultz is still scheduled to testify at next Wednesday's hearing convened by Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont. He only agreed to do so under threat of subpoena.
Sarah Pappin, a Seattle Starbucks worker and member of Starbucks Workers United, said Wednesday in a statement: "Baristas like me are the ones who keep our stores running. We remember our customers' regular orders, make the lattes, clean up spills, and are often the bright spot of our customers' days. We are the heart and soul of Starbucks."
"Instead of celebrating the law-breaking former CEO hell-bent on silencing us, Starbucks should respect our right to organize and meet us at the bargaining table," said Pappin. "We are Starbucks, and we deserve better."
Starbucks Workers United said that "Wednesday's day of action will also serve to welcome the company's new chief executive, Laxman Narasimhan, and send him a message that the transition in the C-suite provides an opportunity for the company to stop its unprecedented campaign of union-busting and instead partner with its workers and our union to build a company that truly lives up to its stated progressive values."
Earlier this month, Starbucks Workers United sent a letter to shareholders urging them to vote for a third-party evaluation of Starbucks' purported commitment to affirming workers' rights, arguing that the corporation's anti-union actions are inconsistent with its International Labor Organization commitments.
According to the union, "Two proxy advisory firms, International Shareholder Services and Glass Lewis, have already recommended Starbucks shareholders vote in favor of the proposal from Trillium Asset Management, the New York City Pension Funds, and other investors."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular
SUPPORT OUR WORK.
We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100%
reader supported.
reader supported.