Showing posts with label affordable universal health care. Show all posts
Showing posts with label affordable universal health care. Show all posts

"We are only as safe as the least insured person in America." -- Sen. Bernie Sanders

Sen. Bernie Sanders delivered a speech on Friday addressing "the lessons the nation can learn" from the coronavirus outbreak, which has intensified progressive demands for Medicare for All, paid sick leave, and other policies that would provide health and economic security for all.

Sanders, a 2020 Democratic presidential candidate, noted that America's for-profit healthcare system has left tens of millions of people in the U.S. uninsured or underinsured in the face of the coronavirus pandemic, highlighting the need for a system that covers everyone as a right.

"If this isn't a red flag for the current dysfunctional and wasteful healthcare system, frankly I don't know what is," Sanders said of COVID-19. "We are only as safe as the least insured person in America."

"This crisis should be a moment in which people ask fundamental questions about the dysfunctionality of our current healthcare system," the Vermont senator added.

In addition to demanding a Medicare for All, single-payer healthcare system, Sanders called for the immediate expansion of unemployment benefits and paid sick leave to help workers and others affected by the coronavirus.

The government's response should "pay attention to the most vulnerable people in this country," Sanders said, not just the wealthy and large corporations.

Watch Sanders' full speech:
 

Read the rushed transcript of Sanders' remarks below:

Good afternoon everyone, thank you for being here. In the midst of a major healthcare and economic crisis currently facing our country, I’d like to take a few minutes to talk about the lessons we can learn long-term about what we are experiencing today.

As I discussed yesterday, our country is facing, as everybody knows, a medical and economic crisis, the likes of which we have not seen for generations. And we must prepare for this response in an unprecedented way, making certain that our government responds effectively, and protects the interests of all our people regardless of their income, or where they live. In other words, this is not just about giving tax breaks to large corporations, but about remembering the people today who don’t have much money, who are nervous about their economic futures and healthcare prospects.

Needless to say we must massively increase the availability of test kits for the coronavirus and the speed at which the tests are processed. We need to anticipate significant increases in hospital admissions, which means that we will need more ICU units and ventilators, we will need more doctors, nurses, and medical personnel of all kinds - and we must make sure that these frontline personnel are well protected from the diseases they are treating. I have talked to nurses recently who worry very much about whether they are getting the kind of knowledge and equipment they need so that they do not get sick.

We need to significantly improve our communications and collaboration with other countries to ensure that we are learning everything that we can about the successes and failures of other countries as they deal with this crisis. And furthermore, we must be honest with the American people and communicate as effectively and directly as we can with all of the scientific information that we can provide.

Further, and most importantly, our response to this entire crisis must be guided by the decisions of doctors, scientists, and researchers, not politicians.

But as we struggle with this crisis, it is also important that we learn the lessons of how we got to where we are today, and what we must do in the future so that we are better prepared for similar crises that may come.

Poll after poll already shows us that the American people understand that we must do what every other major country on earth does, and that is to guarantee healthcare to all of our people as a human right, not a privilege. As we begin to see the failures and vulnerabilities of the current healthcare system, my guess is that those numbers and the demand for universal healthcare will only go up.

The American people are asking: how is it possible that we spend twice as much per capita as the people of Canada and other major countries, while 87 million of us are uninsured or underinsured.

And obviously, in this crisis, and unbelievably, it means that people who are sick today, people who woke up this morning with symptoms of the coronavirus, are saying, “you know I feel sick but I cannot afford to go to a doctor.” And when somebody is not treated for the virus – somebody who is unable to afford to go to that doctor – that means that that infection can spread to many others, putting us at risk.

So it’s not just a question that in normal times – tragically, unbelievably – that we lose 30,000 people a year because they don't get to doctor on time, but now the lack of healthcare threatens other people as well.

How could it be, that when we spend so much more than what other countries are spending, we have millions of people who may be dealing with the virus but they cannot go to the doctor because they can’t afford it? That is a question that must resonate in every American’s mind.

If this isn’t a red flag for the current dysfunctional and wasteful healthcare system, frankly I don’t know what is.

For the benefit of all of us, we must make sure that every person in this country who needs to seek medical treatment can go to a doctor free of charge regardless of their income. That is obviously what we must do now in the middle of a crisis, but it is what we must do as a nation in the near future.

Here are just a few instances about how absurd and dysfunctional our current healthcare system is.

It has been estimated that a full battery of tests for the coronavirus costs over $1,300. First of all, take a look at that – $1,300 to get the test people need to have to know if they have the virus or not.

In America today, 40% of our people don’t have $400 in the bank to pay for an emergency expense.

We have half of our people living paycheck to paycheck.

If their car breaks down they can't afford to get it fixed, and if somebody tells them it costs $1,300 for the test to determine whether you have the coronavirus if they’re sick, what are they supposed to do? What happens to them?

How can someone without insurance afford to pay $1,331 to get tested when they don’t even have $400 in the bank? What are they supposed to do? What happens to them? Do they go to a payday lender where the average interest rate is over 390%? Do they borrow money from their family? Or do they go without the test? Which every doctor in the world will tell them is a test they should have.

And while the Trump administration says it may cover co-pays to cover the cost of testing for those who have insurance, they will not cover the cost of treatment - which could cost tens of thousands of dollars.

How cruel is that? How absurd is that? To say to people, “we’re sorry you have coronavirus, we covered the cost of the test, but now you’re on your own and it’s going to cost tens of thousands of dollars to get treated.” That is totally absurd.

Clearly what we need to do is to make sure that if someone has the coronavirus that person gets the treatment that they need.

In other words, our current system leaves people uninsured, but even if you have insurance you may not even have the ability to travel to a doctor near you.

Because now we’re talking about a system in which many rural hospitals have closed down and they cannot find a doctor in their communities.

The reality today, and this is an issue we must to deal with, is that we don’t have enough doctors, we don’t have enough hospitals, and we don't have enough clinics in rural communities and inner cities.

Further, we are in a situation when we desperately need affordable prescription drugs, yet we have a pharmaceutical industry that continues to make billions in profits by charging outrageous prices for prescription drugs, sometimes 10x more in this country than in other countries.

In my view, the most cost effective way to reform our dysfunctional and cruel system is to move to a Medicare for All, single-payer healthcare system.

And I think in the midst of this crisis, more and more Americans understand the truth of that.

It is nearly impossible to believe that anyone can still think it’s acceptable to continue with a healthcare system that leaves tens of millions of people uninsured. The cruelty and absurdity of that view is more obvious in the midst of this crisis than it has ever been.

And let’s be clear. Lack of healthcare and affordable medicine does not only threaten the healthcare and well-being of the uninsured. It threatens everyone who comes in contact with them.

In fact, what this crisis is beginning to teach us is that we are only as safe as the least insured person in America.

Further, we are the only major country on earth that does not mandate paid family and medical leave. And we’re seeing how that crisis is impacting where we are today.

As we speak, there are millions of workers -- right now -- who are being told to go to work, yet they may be ill and should be staying home.

But these very same families will face financial ruin if they don’t go to work. These are workers in the restaurant industry, transportation industry, tourism, retail -- in other words the people who interact with the public every single day.

Right now, at a time when half of our people live paycheck to paycheck, and at a time of massive wealth and income inequality, we must directly address the economic desperation facing a huge number of Americans.

So we must finally pass a paid family leave program in the United States to keep this virus from spreading and to keep Americans healthy.

We must do it right now.

People should not be going to work when they are sick, it is unfair to them, it is unfair to the people they are in contact with. And yet, that reality exists, because we are the only major country on earth not to guarantee paid family leave and sick time.

Finally, from a national security perspective, it is incomprehensible that we are dependent on China and other countries for masks, for prescription drugs, for rubber gloves, and for key parts needed to make advanced medical equipment like ventilators.

As a result of globalization and our disastrous trade policies, we have been outsourcing millions of jobs and factories overseas that have gutted our economy. Now we are seeing another tragic and devastating result of those policies, as we find ourselves dependent on other countries to provide the most essential things we need to combat a pandemic and protect the lives of the people in our country.

Now trade is a good thing, but it has to be based on common sense principles. It has to be based on protecting American workers and protecting our national security, making sure we are producing what we need in this country in the event of a national crisis.

Now is the time to begin bringing back production and manufacturing to the United States and enact fair trade policies so that we are never in this position again.

Now here is the bottom line. As we are dealing with this crisis, we need to listen to the scientists, to the researchers, and to the medical professionals, not politicians.

We need to move quickly to prepare for the exponential increase of cases we will be seeing here in our country.

But as we do that, we must begin thinking about how, as a society, we can create a healthcare and economic system that is humane, that is compassionate, and that works for all people, not just the wealthiest.

Now that is an issue that people have had to think about for a long time, but I think in this moment of crisis more and more people understand that we need fundamental changes to our economy, and we need fundamental changes to our healthcare system.


Published on Friday, March 13, 2020, by Common Dreams. Sanders Says Coronavirus 'A Red Flag for Current Dysfunctional and Wasteful Healthcare System' by Jake Johnson, staff writer (Common Dreams)

The Long War: Without lies, could ruling elites justify their wars?

The Real News interviews David Swanson on his new book War Is A Lie, a much-needed counterweight to the mass of disinformation that distorts our understanding of American politics and history. For the United States, war is an economic enterprise, enormously profitable for those engaged in it, crushingly expensive for the rest of us. We didn't listen when Eisenhower warned us about the danger we faced from military-industrial power. It will be interesting to see if, after 40 years of increasing control over American life, corporate power can be arrested now.
.
A coalition of antiwar groups has proposed a major action for April 9, 2011.

2010: Triangulation -- third way, bipartisanship -- was a mistake.

How different this election season would have been if two years ago the Obama administration and the Democratic leadership had come out with guns blazing. Affordable, universal health care -- Medicare for all. Meaningful financial regulation. A stimulus program built around job creation, infrastructure spending, and protection of state and local governments. These are the specifics of "hope" and "change."
What I hear on the ground is, people didn't say you went too far on health care. They say "You didn't do enough. You should have had a public option. You should have had this; you should have had that. You didn't go too far on job creation, you should have created more jobs." No one has said to me, "You know, Rich, you guys went too far in regulating Wall Street." Most people want to tar and feather them for what they have done. -- AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka
The rest of the story: Trumka: Primarying Lincoln Was 'Priceless', Dems Will Realize Their Timidity by Sam Stein (Huffinton Post 2010-10-05).

Health Care Reform: How Do Employers React to A Pay-or-Play Mandate?

Early Evidence from San Francisco Is Positive
In 2006 San Francisco adopted major health reform, becoming the first city to implement a pay-or-play employer health spending mandate. It also created Healthy San Francisco, a “public option” to promote affordable universal access to care. Using the 2008 Bay Area Employer Health Benefits Survey, we find that most employers (75%) had to increase health spending to comply with the law, yet most (64%) are supportive of the law. There is substantial employer demand for the public option, with 21% of firms using Healthy San Francisco for at least some employees, yet there is little evidence of firms dropping existing insurance offerings in the first year after implementation. -- How Do Employers React to A Pay-or-Play Mandate? Early Evidence from San Francisco by Carrie Hoverman Colla, William H. Dow, Arindrajit Dube (NBER Working Paper No. 16179 July 2010).
This paper can be purchased on-line in pdf format for $5 for electronic delivery from SSRN.com.

Health Care: The Unbearable Lightness of Reform

by Bill Moyers and Michael Winship

That wickedly satirical Ambrose Bierce described politics as "the conduct of public affairs for private advantage."

Bierce vanished to Mexico nearly a hundred years ago -- to the relief of the American political class of his day, one assumes -- but in an eerie way he was forecasting America's political culture today. It seems like most efforts to reform a system that's gone awry -- to clean house and make a fresh start -- end up benefiting the very people who wrecked it in the first place.

Which is why Bierce, in his classic little book, The Devil's Dictionary, defined reform as "a thing that mostly satisfies reformers opposed to reformation."

So we got health care reform this week -- but it's a far cry from reformation. You can't blame President Obama for celebrating what he did get -- he and the Democrats needed some political points on the scoreboard. And imagine the mood in the White House if the vote had gone the other way; they would have been cutting wrists instead of cake.

Give the victors their due: the bill Obama signed expands coverage to many more people, stops some very ugly and immoral practices by the health insurance industry that should have been stopped long ago, and offers a framework for more change down the road, if there's any heart or will left to fight for it.

But reformation? Hardly. For all their screaming and gnashing of teeth, the insurance companies still make out like bandits. Millions of new customers, under penalty of law, will be required to buy the companies' policies, feeding the insatiable greed of their CEO's and filling the campaign coffers of the politicians they wine and dine. Profits are secure; they don't have to worry about competition from a public alternative to their cartel, and they can continue to scam us without fear of antitrust action.

The big drug companies bought their protection before the fight even began, when the White House agreed that if they supported Obama's brand of health care reform -- not reformation -- they could hold onto their monopoly. No imports of cheaper drugs from abroad, no prescriptions filled at a lower price by our friendly Canadian neighbors to the north.

And let's not forget another, gigantic health care winner: a new report from the nonpartisan Center for Public Integrity says the battle for reform has been "a bonanza" for the lobbying industry. According to the Center's analysis, "About 1,750 businesses and organizations hired about 4,525 lobbyists, total -- eight for each member of Congress -- and spent at least $1.2 billion to influence health care bills and other issues."

But while we're at it, a cheer for the federal student loan overhaul -- Democrats managed to pass that reform with an end run around powerful lobbyists, cleverly nestling it in the health care reconciliation package.

Nonetheless, under pressure from the lending industry, it, too, was watered down from its original intent. The three Democratic senators who voted against -- Ben Nelson, Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor -- have all received campaign contributions from Nelnet, the student loan company based in Nelson's home state of Nebraska, or its lobbyists.

(And would you be amazed to learn that one of the student loan industry's lobbyists used to be Blanche Lincoln's chief of staff? The Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call described Kelly Bingel as Lincoln's "alter ego," and cited a former colleague saying Bingel was "first on the list of the Senator's callbacks," words that would sound like heaven to any Washington lobbyist's ears.)

Another case of reform gone off track: this week, a year and a half after Wall Street brought us so close to fiscal hell we could smell the brimstone, a crippled little financial regulation bill seems to be hobbling out of the wreckage, but still faces an array of well-armed forces gunning for it.

No wonder. In the 2008 and 2010 election cycles, members of the Senate Banking Committee -- which sent the bill to Congress this week -- received more than $39 million from Wall Street and the banks; members of the House Financial Services Committee raked in more than $21 million -- so far. Just how serious do you think they're going to be about true reform?

Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd of Connecticut has sounded like a champion of reform ever since he announced he will not run for reelection. It's about time. Since 2005, his top ten campaign contributors have included Citigroup, AIG, Merrill Lynch and the now deceased Bear Stearns, all front-line players in bringing on the financial calamity.

Then there are the Republicans, shamelessly hawking their favors en masse to the highest bidder. The website Politico.com reports that the reelection campaign of Tennessee Senator Bob Corker -- who's one of the key negotiators on financial reform -- sent an e-mail to Wall Street lobbyists and others soliciting contributions of up to $10,000 for a chance to meet or grab a meal with the senator.

Informed of the e-mail, Corker was shocked -- shocked! -- saying the e-mail was "grotesque and inappropriate." But did House Republican leader John Boehner think it was inappropriate last week when he advised the American Bankers Association to fight back against the proposed rules and regulations?

This is, of course, the same John Boehner who in the summer of 1995 walked around the floor of the House of Representatives handing out checks to his fellow Republicans -- checks from a tobacco company. And the same John Boehner who was the grateful recipient of campaign contributions from the four Native American tribes represented by Jack Abramoff, the corrupt lobbyist currently cooling his heels in a Federal corrections facility.

So wouldn't it have been fascinating to have been a fly on the wall earlier this year when Boehner sat down for drinks with Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase? Reportedly, he invited Dimon and the rest of the financial community to pony up the cash and see what good things follow.

According to The Wall Street Journal, Republicans already were receiving an increasing share of campaign contributions from the Street. In the game of reform, it's the political version of loading the dice.

We can't know for sure what Ambrose Bierce would have made of all this; what The Devil's Dictionary author would say about the current DC scams. But he might have agreed that the only answer to organized money is organized people. That would be one hell of a reformation.

Bill Moyers is managing editor and Michael Winship is senior writer of the weekly public affairs program Bill Moyers Journal, which airs Friday night on PBS. Check local airtimes or comment at The Moyers Blog.

This article originally appeared on CommonDreams.Org.

Press Release O' the Day: Real Socialists Don't Heart Obamacare

Reality check:

Socialist Party USA Co-Chair Opposes Obama Healthcare Bill

March 22, 2009- Co-chair of the Socialist Party USA, Billy Wharton, opposes the healthcare bill passed yesterday by the House of Representatives and scheduled to be signed into law by President Barack Obama on Tuesday. Wharton’s opposition is based on the belief that this bill is not a reform. Instead, it is a corporate restructuring of the health insurance industry created to protect the profit margins of private insurance companies.

The bill passed by the House yesterday would mandate all Americans to purchase health insurance coverage or face a fine. It would also create health insurance exchanges, an idea crafted by the right-wing Heritage Foundation, where people would purchase insurance from private companies. Those not eligible for Medicaid but who still could not afford to purchase insurance would receive public funds from the federal government to purchase bare bones coverage insurance plans from private insurers.

Wharton opposes this restructuring on the grounds that the mandates allow private insurers to use the coercive power of the state to enhance their private profits. Insurance credits will serve as a public subsidy to private companies. It is yet another case of public money that could be used for necessary social programs being funneled towards companies that engage in practices that are abusive and detrimental to the overall society. He believes the bill is also a demonstration of how deeply corporate lobbyists and campaign contributions have infected the country’s political system.

“This is not a healthcare reform bill,” says Wharton, “It is instead a corporate restructuring of the American healthcare system designed to enhance the profits of private health insurance companies disguised with the language of reform”

Instead, Wharton believes that public funds would be better spent in creating a national single-payer system. Democratic socialists see such a system of open access to care as one part of a larger transition toward making healthcare a guaranteed human right for all. Wharton calls for people to take power into their own hands by supporting the demand for single-payer health insurance and by conducting a red and green rebellion at the voting booth and in the streets to claim our human rights.

Wharton encourages people to visit the website of the Socialist Party USA to gain more information about the struggle for healthcare and the organization’s broader vision of a democratic socialist society. -- Socialist Party USA
There you go. Word's still out on whether he's the Antichrist, but at least Obama is not a socialist.

Health Care Reform: Mr. Weiner kicks butt

If health care reform had been left in the hands of Anthony Weiner (and Dennis Kucinich and John Conyers and Alan Grayson and Sheldon Whitehouse and Sherrod Brown and Bernie Sanders), the bill would deliver real affordable universal care and ass would have been kicked to get it done. Watch how Weiner does it:



Despite lukewarm expressions of support from the president, it was never intended by the White House that a public option would be part of the final plan. Now, however, a majority of senators is on record in support of a public option to create competition for the private insurers and thus lower costs. When the dust settles and the Senate bill has been passed and amended, will a public option survive, or did the senators who indicated support for competition -- the 43 who signed the pledge and the eight others who said they were "open" to it -- do so only because it seemed a safe bet at the time that they'd never have to make good on it?

Health Care: Is that all there is?

“We are on the verge of taking a decisive step to providing access to all Americans, to affordable quality health care. If we do nothing, the system will go bankrupt, premiums will keep skyrocketing and benefits will keep getting slashed.” -- California Democratic Rep. Henry A. Waxman, a steward of the leadership's version health care reform in the House.

While this is true as far as it goes, if the Congress doesn't do enough, the system also will go bankrupt, premiums will keep skyrocketing and benefits will keep getting slashed. Although Obamacare delivers improvements over the current system, it doesn't do nearly enough to cut costs. The irony is that instead of shutting down the rapacious, corrupt and inefficient private insurance industry, the current plan expands it and cements it in place. The industry already has undo influence on policy; after the "reform" delivers 35 million more policy holders and $500 billion in public money into its pockets over the next decade, real reform will become impossible. The Democrats are about to force people to buy health insurance products no matter how substandard they are or how much they cost. This is not what people think they're going to get when they vote for Democrats. In addition, some of the public funds that will go to subsidize the private insurance industry will be taken from Medicare. The most popular, effective and necessary social welfare program in American history will be weakened to strengthen the private insurance giants. This is not what people think they're going to get when they vote for Democrats. As Harvard Department of Social Medicine professor Marcia Angell MD told Bill Moyers, "we have chosen, alone among all advanced countries, to leave health care to for-profit industries, to leave health care to businesses that then distribute health care as a market commodity according to the ability to pay and not according to medical need." Nor is this what people thought they were getting when they gave Democrats control of the legislature and the White House.

The rest of the story: Bill Moyers' Journal (2010-03-05)

Health Care Reform: Medicare For All

It's still the best option, as Florida Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) blogged yesterday on The Hill:
Health care reform -- here's where we are. The House of Representatives is about to vote on a Senate bill without a public option. It looks like the reconciliation amendment will not have a public option. The House bill had a public option, but once the House passes the Senate bill, that's history.

Which is why I introduced H.R. 4789, the Public Option Act. This simple four-page bill lets any American buy into Medicare at cost. You want it, you pay for it, you're in. It adds nothing to the deficit; you pay what it costs.

Let's face it. Health insurance companies charge as much money as possible, and they provide as little care as possible. The difference is called profit. You can't blame them for it; that's what a corporation does. Birds got to fly, fish got to swim, health insurers got to rip you off. And if you get really expensive, they've got to pull the plug on you. So for those of us who would like to stay alive, we need a public option.

In many areas of the country, one or two insurers have over 80% of the market. They can charge anything they want. And when you get sick, they can flip the bird at you. So we need a public option.

And they face no real competition because it costs billions of dollars just to set up a national health care network. In fact, the only one that's nationwide is . . . Medicare. And we limit that to one-eight of the population. It's like saying that only seniors can drive on federal highways. We really need a public option.

And to the right-wing loons who call it socialism, we say, "if you want to be a slave to the insurance companies, that's fine. If you want 30% of your premiums to go to 'administrative costs' and billion-dollar bonuses for insurance CEOs who figure out new and creative ways to deny you the care you need to stay healthy and alive, that's fine. But don't you try to dictate to me that I can't have a public option!"

And there is a way left to get it. By insisting on a vote on H.R. 4789. Three votes on health care, not two. The Senate bill, the reconciliation amendments, and the Public Option Act.

We got 50 co-sponsors for this bill in two days. Including five powerful committee chairman. But we need more.

Sign our Petition at WeWantMedicare.com.

Call. Write. Visit. Do whatever you can do to get you Congressman to co-sponsor this bill, and push it to a vote. Right now, before it's too late.

Let's do it!

In the Senate-Obama plan, universality is achieved at the expense of affordability. Regardless of what happens in the House on Sunday, H.R. 4789 should be voted up as soon as possible.

More like a wake than a christening


"Democrats have finally -- and after jettisoning any trace of government-run health care while swallowing new abortion restrictions -- found their way to success; the overnight vote proves they have the numbers to prevail in the remaining votes this week. But it certainly wasn't pretty."

The rest of the story:
An ugly finale for health-care reform by Dana Milbank (WaPo)

Hey, hey, ho, ho, Affordable Care Act has got to go!


"Give me liberty and give me death!

                         -- Slogan of protesters against affordable universal health care, according to Wait Wait....Don't Tell Me's Peter Sagal.
 
Related Posts with Thumbnails