Today’s newspaper had a headline that really jumped out at me.
Uninsured Masses Lack Political Clout http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20090412/NEWS02/904120334We all know that it is true, but since when did the corporate media feel empowered to boast about it? Didn’t middle America just elect a president to represent all the people? Isn’t someone in our nation’s capital going to take issue with this statement?
The uninsured "do not provide political benefit for the aid you give them," said Robert Blendon, a professor of health policy and political analysis at the Harvard School of Public Health. "That's one of the dilemmas in getting all this money. If I'm in Congress, and I help out farmers, they'll help me out politically. But if I help out the uninsured, they are not likely to help members of Congress get re-elected."
What the hell? I thought last November was supposed to be about
change. . You know, empowering the worker and punishing greedy corporate executives.
Don’t tell me we have all been had.
Tonight, my mother informed me of rumors she had heard that the Obama administration, under the guidance of Rahm Emmanuel, was pushing to privatize Medicare. She was wrong. Republicans are the ones who openly talk about that. Emmanuel and his physician brother have only
written about it.
http://www.healthbeatblog.org/2008/12/ezekiel-emanuel-appointed-as-healthcare-advisor.htmlI can understand her concern, in light of other recent administration actions which seem to favor Big Business. Take telecom immunity, which benefits AT&T, a client of David Axelrod’s ASK and Obama’s internet fundraiser turned White House computer adviser. Then, there is the way that the White House publicly scolds the “banksters” who have robbed us blind, but then turns around and agrees to let them squander our tax dollars on bonuses for their criminally incompetent executives. A recent suggestion that veterans start taking care of their own service related illness through private insurance probably sounded good to United Health.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/17/dems-fuming-over-white-ho_n_176006.html Even the escalation of fighting in Afghanistan helps out America’s corporate class, by giving the Military Industrial Complex a way to continue feeding at the trough of federal tax dollars.
Speaking of health insurance, somewhere someone is saying “But Obama is keeping his promises. He is working to get us all health care.”
Not so fast. Even the push for universal health care is not necessarily the worker friendly position that it seems. We all know that we need health care reform, but some of us need it for different reasons than others do.
The nation’s employers have been pushing the federal government to take over the responsibility of providing health insurance. They are not concerned about their employees’ health, mind you. They are just sick of paying high premiums and would rather see the feds do it. Health care providers---the doctors, hospitals, drug companies—that make up the mega-business sometimes called the Medical Industrial Complex are also ready to have Washington start writing (blank) checks. And who can blame them? The health insurance industry has made an art out of inventing new ways not to meet its contractual obligation to pay its members’ health costs.
Unfortunately, no one in Washington seems to have the will to “just say no” to the health insurance industry. When compromises or concessions are called for, we, the American people, are required to make them. Take the much touted
Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, the one that Obama once promised to give to all Americans. Here is a 2009 American Federation of Government Employees policy statement which describes the many problems with their insurance.
http://www.afge.org/index.cfm?page=2009ConferenceIssuePapers&Fuse=Content&ContentID=1742Even though it is the largest insurance plan in the country, the feds refuse to bargain with the insurer or with drug companies. Instead, they have chosen to trim benefits while raising premiums and deductibles.
FEHBP contains all of the flaws of the private health care system that Senator Obama’s health care plan seeks to rectify. FEHBP cannot be the alternative “public plan” because it has none of the virtues of a public plan, and all of the shortcomings of a private plan. Indeed, it is worse than most large, private employer plans because its structure squanders the leverage it might exercise over venders and providers to obtain the lowest prices. As described below, it fails the most basic test of an employer plan: it doesn’t even provide universal coverage for federal employees, retirees, and their families.
An estimated 250,000 federal employees are uninsured, because they can not afford their premiums. So much for the notion that the government will take care of us. If Washington can not be bothered to see that the people who work for them are getting good care, who here really thinks that they will go to bat for the nation’s millions of uninsured, a disproportionate number of whom are members of racial minorities?
http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=3ccbde4c3292fd275665b3ebe7f01f02 The massive public attention and anger over the health crisis has caused insurers, their lobbyists and political flacks to scramble. America’s Health Insurance Plans, the major insurer industry group, recently announced that it will put its considerable muscle behind health care reform. On the surface, the announcement seemed to be a major breakthrough: the industry has finally seen the light and will work with President Obama to make real health care reform a reality. But that’s not the case. The group has not softened its resistance to providing coverage to those that it labels “high risk” or, less charitably, “undesirables.” Those are the millions who suffer chronic and major diseases—cancer, diabetes, asthma and heart disease. Blacks and Latinos have higher incidences of these ailments than whites.
Recently, we were told that private insurers would consider opening their plans to all comers---but only if the feds imposed a mandate requiring everyone to purchase
private health insurance. This is something which Obama campaigned strongly against.
You see, the Obama campaign has demonized the idea of mandates — most recently in a scare-tactics mailer sent to voters that bears a striking resemblance to the “Harry and Louise” ads run by the insurance lobby in 1993, ads that helped undermine our last chance at getting universal health care.
Paul Krugman The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/opinion/04krugman.htmlGiven the way that he endorsed the
No Mandates position, will he really change his position now, just because the insurance industry executives ask for it? Motives matter in this discussion. If the
universal in universal health care is being embraced for the right reasons---because the folks in Washington care about the well being of Americans---then maybe they will tailor the fix to our health crisis so that it actually does us some good. If they are doing it for the wrong reason---because UnitedHealth and Blue Cross Blue Shield want more money---then they are going to screw up health care reform, because
what is good for business is not necessarily good for the worker. Take equal coverage and health care for members of racial minorities. The nation’s employers have supported policies which systematically discriminate against Black and Hispanics. They do this, because an oppressed, poorly educated, medically deprived group is more easily exploited as a low wage work force. The presence of these marginalized groups in the U.S. allows employers to lower wages and benefits for
all workers. Members of different groups are pitted against each other, so that they do not notice that the boss is screwing everyone equally.
If health care reform is driven by the nation’s employers, you can bet that equal care for minorities will be way down on the list of priorities. There are many ways that the feds can create a supposedly universal plan that slights minorities. All they have to do is look the other way as the Medical Industrial Complex and Health Insurance Industry continue to do what they have done for years.
Studies have found that when blacks and Hispanics do receive treatment, the care they receive is more likely to be substandard than that of whites. Reports indicate that even when blacks and Hispanics are enrolled in high quality health plans, the gap in the care and quality of medical treatment still remains.
http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=3ccbde4c3292fd275665b3ebe7f01f02It matters
how health care reform is enacted. The mere fact that the Democrats and the Obama administration are working on a plan does not mean that they have us covered.
So, how can we know if the new administration is keeping its promises? A much better litmus test is the
Employee Free Choice Act , a piece of legislation designed to remove federally approved roadblocks to unionization. America’s business community hates the bill with a passion. This is the legislation that Bank of America's executive officer wanted squashed so badly that he recommended shooting business owners who did not give money to John McCain. If the business community has its claws in the new administration, they will make sure that it fails.
So far, Obama has supported the law. Sort of.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/12/obamas-remarks-on-employe_n_166345.html In his Wednesday interview, Obama did add a wrinkle to the debate. Reflecting his usual predisposition again political fights, he discussed the notion of compromise between business-backed forces that view EFCA as a poison pill to the economy, and the labor community that has poured countless time and resources to the legislation's passage.
"Whether those conversations can bear fruit over the next several months, we'll see," the president said. "But I'm always a big believer in before we gear up for some tooth-and-nail battle, that we see if some accommodations can't be found."
Inside labor, however, there is scant talk of compromise on EFCA, primarily because the key provisions are so cut and dry -- either employees can form a union by having a majority of workers sign authorization cards, or they can't.
"We don't mind because he is Obama and that is what he does," said the source, "but this isn't really something you can compromise on... You could tweak around the outsides like have more time until it's implemented. But on the core card-check part, you either do it or you can't, not much wiggle room."
The Act is needed, because up until now, employers have been able to exploit loopholes in existing legislation to keep their workers from organizing. If more Americans are able to unionize, the political clout of average citizens in relation to big money interests will increase. We will be able to make our voices heard. Business absolutely, positively does not want to see this to happen.
I will be watching to see just how far the Obama administration is willing to go to keep its promise on this all important issue.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
