Bill Moyers with Dr. Margaret Flowers - She is Right ....

"Knowing that this is even, in terms of our economic recovery, this is vital, because our whole health system is a drag on our entire economic situation."

Complete transcript and video...
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/02052010/watch3.html


"...BILL MOYERS: If the President had sent a staff person out to invite you in for coffee last week, what would you have told him?

DR. MARGARET FLOWERS: I would have told him that the American people were expecting more from him, that there's been such a huge amount of suffering in this country and preventable deaths. And that it's completely unacceptable that we are the only industrialized nation that allows this to happen. And that, it doesn't have to be this way, because we have the money. We're already spending more than any other country, so it's not an issue of whether we have the money. We have the resources to have one of the top health systems in the world. And why wasn't this debate about what is best for the people? Knowing that this is even, in terms of our economic recovery, this is vital, because our whole health system is a drag on our entire economic situation. So why is he excluding us? Why isn't he letting us be at the table, when this makes complete sense from a public policy, public health policy, economic health policy standpoint?


...BILL MOYERS: What was the most revealing moment that told you how strong and powerful the special interests, the industries are?

DR. MARGARET FLOWERS: That was really last May, when we decided that we needed to go to the Senate Finance Committee and stand up, because we had been working for months prior to that, meeting with members of Congress who would tell us, "Yes, it makes perfect sense that we should include your proposal along with what we're putting together." We just said, "Just compare them. Compare them on universality. Compare them on cost control. Just let's have an honest debate about what's really the best." And when it came down to it, they just said, "Oh, no, we didn't really mean what we said about that. And we're not going to include you." And when we heard that they weren't going to allow us to have someone testify at that Senate Finance Committee, we just knew right then we have to do something different...."

http://pnhp.org/blog/2010/02/04/cms-health-spending-projections/

http://content.healthaffairs.org/cgi/content/full/hlthaff.2009.1074v1

"From the Office of the Actuary, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Health Affairs
February 4, 2010

Projections for 2010:

National Health Expenditures (NHE): $2,569.6 billion

NHE per capita: $8,289.9

NHE as percent of GDP: 17.3%

NHE projected average annual growth, 2009-2019: 6.1%

Abstract:

The economic recession and rising unemployment—plus changing demographics and baby boomers aging into Medicare—are among the factors expected to influence health spending during 2009–2019. In 2009 the health share of gross domestic product (GDP) is expected to have increased 1.1 percentage points to 17.3 percent—the largest single-year increase since 1960. Average public spending growth rates for hospital, physician and clinical services, and prescription drugs are expected to exceed private spending growth in the first four years of the projections. As a result, public spending is projected to account for more than half of all U.S. health care spending by 2012..."


Woolhandler and Himmelstein: Paying For National Health Insurance — And Not Getting It (Health Affairs, July/August 2002):

http://www.pnhp.org/publications/payingnotgetting.pdf

"Taxes pay for a larger share of U.S. health care than most Americans
think they do..."


Comment by Don McCanne MD ...

"Same story every year. Health care spending continues to increase at rates well in excess of inflation, and health care continues to represent an increasing percentage of our gross domestic product.

One important technical point. The CMS authors report that public spending will soon account for more than half of all U.S. health care spending. But they leave out two important taxpayer sources of health care financing: 1) tax subsidies in the form of tax deductions for employer-sponsored plans, and 2) the purchase of health benefit programs for public employees. In their classic paper (link above), Woolhandler and Himmelstein demonstrated that this results in a figure of government spending about fifteen percentage points higher than the numbers reported in this annual CMS report.

Using a back-of-the-envelope update, the government is already using taxpayer funds to finance about two-thirds of our national health expenditures (NHE). In a financing system that only Americans would design, a significant portion of those funds, without much transparency, are funneled through to the inefficient, wasteful private insurance plans and recategorized as private spending.

...We should be receiving much greater value for our health care spending, but we won’t under the proposal before Congress. It has been designed to funnel even more taxpayer funds to the private insurance industry, with the guarantee that they can draw off for themselves fifteen to twenty percent of the funds they receive.

With that model of a financing system, we can anticipate that we will receive the same depressing report from CMS each year until finally our finances and our health are ruined by the imposition of the forces of Stein’s Law. With a single payer national health program – an improved Medicare for all – it doesn’t have to be that way."


Stein’s Law – hitting the wall
http://pnhp.org/blog/2010/02/02/steins-law-hitting-the-wall/

"...At over $2.5 trillion (almost 18 percent of our GDP), the level of health care spending in the United States this year is almost intolerable. Yet we hear predictions that health care will represent half of our GDP by 2082, and that Medicare will accumulate a deficit of $38 trillion.

Thank goodness for Stein’s Law. We will never see these numbers for the simple reason that this rate of increase cannot go on forever. It will stop once it hits the wall.

Herbert Stein, being from the Chicago School of Economics (think Milton Friedman), did not believe that steps must be taken to intervene since the problem would take care of itself. Although that is true, the problem with this sterile, amoral view, common amongst those of the Chicago School, is that it ignores the consequences of a spontaneous economic process devoid of the input from the heart and soul of beneficent public stewards.


...Under a single payer national health program – an improved and expanded Medicare for all – Stein’s wall will still be there. But instead of letting the entire system crash into the wall, our own beneficent public stewards – if we elect ones with a heart – will be there to make sure that everyone receives the care that they need. The resources that we use may take us up to the wall, but we won’t be crashing into it.

Every other industrialized nation has an impenetrable Stein wall, but by using normative economics, they don’t sacrifice their citizens by slamming them into that wall."

She seemed on the verge of tears through most of it.

the discussions, same thing happened under Clinton and to see this happening again is very sad.

. . . people like Dr. Flowers aren't allowed to bring these ideas (which have overwhelming support!) to the table. :rant:

and as noted back in the 90's, the more people find out about a Medicare for All system, the more people like it.

And that is why there should be no discussion.

:(

It's Time for a Real Debate on National Health Insurance

May 12,1993

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6499259&mesg_id=6499259

snip >>>

"Similar strong support for Medicare for All was found the last time health reform was on the top of the nation’s agenda, during the Clinton administration. In 1993, a citizen jury sat for 8 hours a day for five days in Washington, DC before making their choice among the then-leading options for health reform: managed competition (supported by Clinton), medical savings accounts, and single payer. Single payer received 17 out of 24 votes (70 percent). There were 5 votes for Clinton’s plan, and none for medical savings accounts. Focus groups conducted that year by Democratic pollster Celinda Lake reported the same strong support for single payer. “After conducting extensive focus groups on health care, pollster Celinda Lake discovered that the more people are told about the Canadian system, “the higher the support goes.” In contrast, according to Lake, working Americans found the managed competition idea “laughable.”

a nutshell:



I have done posts on Dr. Flowers in the past here on DU as well and can't help thinking that this frail quiet woman is trying to shoulder the whole burden of this pretty much on her own. She needs us to start showing up and helping her. If I lived anywhere near Washington DC, I would, but I am on the other coast here.

One thing for sure that I haven't done, is that I'm going to get in contact with Dr. Flowers and offer my assistance in bringing her cause to our local Democrats here and see if we can get them fired up in local chapters to get some kind of movement rolling. I have up until now been wasting my time trying to call and write letters to the White House and call and write letters to Congress. It seems like we all have been knocking on the wrong doors. It really is time to get active in maybe offering our own non-profit insurance company to compete with the BCs of the nation.

thanks.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6847370&mesg_id=6851408

"Here are the questions asked by the AP-Yahoo poll:

ISS14. Which comes closest to your view?


“The United States should adopt a universal health insurance program in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that is run by the government and financed by taxpayers.”

“Do you consider yourself a supporter of a single-payer health care system, that is a national health plan financed by taxpayers in which all Americans would get their insurance from a single government plan, or not?”

Sixty-five percent answered yes to the first question, and 54 percent said yes to the second one.

A single-payer system and a Medicare-for-all system are synonymous. Why, then, was support higher for extending Medicare to all than for a system described as a “single-payer”? The answer, it seems obvious to me, is the level of familiarity people have with Medicare versus the concept of “single payer.” Medicare is a familiar program, while the phrase “single-payer” is not..."

For advocating this. I think that we could cover everyone in Medicare in steps, first, by allowing anyone over age 50 to buy into Medicare, which would not be mandatory initieally.(I'm sure everyone in this age group would enroll--not doing so would be a gamble.) In succeeding years, the age would be reduced--first to 30 or 35. When everyone is is allowed to enroll, we would then make enrolling mandatory.

she has put her practice of medicine on hold for the time being in the hopes SP would be allowed into the discussions.

Just afraid that if we try the incremental approach it could be years before another age group is added...I thought we would work on other age groups after the Medicare was signed into law. Maybe sometimes it pays to go for the gold, especially with all the boomers moving to Medicare.

:shrug:

:patriot:

Thanks for the thread, slipslidingaway.:thumbsup:

profession giving up their time and money for their patients/future patients.

:hi:

California Health Professional Student Alliance Single Payer Rally in Sacramento

http://pnhp.org/news/2010/january/california-health-professional-student-alliance-single-payer-rally-in-sacramento

"About a thousand California Health Professional Student Alliance marchers and supporters gathered on the steps of the Capitol in Sacramento to rally for single payer health care reform--their fifth annual event. Featured speaker was Senator Mark Leno, author of SB 810, California OneCare, the single payer bill now making its way through the legislature. The bill is expected to pass late in the summer of 2010."



Student Success at CA Single Payer Lobby Day: The fruits of enthusiasm and organization
Posted by Chapter News Blogger on Monday, Jan 25, 2010
by JB Fenix, CaPA Fellow

http://pnhp.org/blog/2010/01/25/student-success-at-ca-single-payer-lobby-day-the-fruits-of-enthusiasm-and-organization/

"On Monday, January 11th, over 1,000 people rallied for California Single Payer on the steps of the Sacramento Capitol building. Following the rally, 500 health professional students from over 20 different California campuses, and ten different professional programs held over 90 legislative meetings. Through their efforts, state single-payer gained at least 3 additional co-authorships and a fresh cohort of legislators and staffers were educated in the midst of a pessimistic national debate.

The event was preceded by a six-hour training day on top of 8-hour bus rides for half of the students who left Southern California at 4 a.m. on Sunday morning. The two-day CaHPSA “Lobby Day” event was itself preceded by over 10 statewide conference calls, two regional conferences (with many days of preparation each), multiple press releases from the student media team, one leadership conference, and countless hours of work from local campus student teams including speakers’ series and fundraising drives. The event will be followed-up by selecting statewide student leaders, and campus student teams; by holding regional and campus training workshops; and by continuing to build partnerships with pro-single payer organizations and in key legislative offices through, with a little luck, summer student internships.

All of this should be seen as a phenomenal success, especially considering that it is 100% student run and that the students receive little if any support for their activities. So how can we explain such success amidst an unfriendly environment and when reform at the national level is struggling so dismally? And how can this success be replicated in other states? Two words: Enthusiasm and Organization..."

Peace to you.

:hi:

sure it can provide a comfortable lifestyle, but I doubt most people go into medicine for that reason.

:)

of what went down. very sad though

at the WH. When SP could not get an invitation they asked people to call the WH and planned a white coat demonstration in front of the White House. At the last minute Dr. Oliver Fein was invited and the demonstration was called off, looking back this was most likely a mistake.

Behind the scenes there was a conference in late 2007 (see link below) when health care professionals were pretty much told that the policy discussions had ended and that they needed to focus on the political means of enacting the chosen policy.

No wonder the plans of the leading candidates all sounded similar.

:)

When the bills were introduced they did not resemble the original Hacker plan, although not many wanted to speak out.

In early 2008 there was the introduction of the Jacob Hacker plan "Health Care for America" there is a video of Jacob Hacker and the EPI talking about the plan. Also in 2008 Health Care for America (Now) was formed and they became a dominant voice in the HC debate. The idea of the public option helped silence the Medicare For All voices.

It is crucial and sad to see what has transpired.


Health Care For America
3:10 minutes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-J9ZgCRiD8


Where are we on reform? Part 2 (Hacker)
Health Reform Lessons from the Past
Jacob Hacker, PhD
National Conference on the Un and Underinsured
December 12, 2007 (Day 3)

http://pnhp.org/news/2008/january/where-are-we-on-reform-part-2-hacker

Comment:
By Don McCanne, MD

"The final Quote of the Day for 2007 discussed the disconnect between a new poll indicating strong support (65%) for "a universal health insurance program in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that is run by the government and financed by taxpayers," and a rapidly growing movement within the progressive community to support a model based on allowing you to keep the insurance you have...

Jacob Hacker has described very accurately the politics of health care reform. He has suggested an approach that, on surface, would appear to lead to affordable coverage for everyone, while passing the crucial test of political feasibility. His political message is very sound - in fact, so sound that the leading Democratic candidates have adopted his suggestions. He has stressed the importance of coalition building well in advance of the installation of a new government one year from now.

So what coalition activities are we seeing within the progressive community? Many respected, influential leaders state that it is time to set aside the policy debate and proceed with a political strategy that will achieve our reform goals. There is one major problem with this approach: most of the difficult policy issues have yet to be addressed. But several of these coalition leaders have told the policy community quite bluntly that the policy debate is over, and all of the activities now must be about unity. We are commanded to unify behind health care reform that promises that you can keep the insurance you have or have the option to buy into a public program.

That's it. That's the policy behind which we are to unify. For the sake of unity, we are not to talk about the inability of the private insurance industry to provide us with affordable health plans that are comprehensive enough to meet our health care needs. We are not to talk about a public insurance program that must provide a premium that is competitive with private plans insuring the healthy, when the public plan is weighted down with high-cost patients (adverse selection)..."

If anyone knows of a video of the testimony please post it.

I watched part of this hearing live, they did give Dr. Flowers a chair, although she practically had no table and her microphone was shared with Ron Williams of Aetna.

It looked like an uncomfortable position to be in, especially when she had to reach across and grab the microphone to try and have a chance to speak.



http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/june/testimony_of_margare.php

"We have reached a unique point in American history and we have an opportunity for real health care reform. The economic downturn, the millions of Americans who can’t get needed care and the election of a President who understands that health care is a human right place us in the position to finish what President Franklin Delano Roosevelt hoped to accomplish almost 75 years ago in the Social Security Act: a national health system. The lack of a coordinated and comprehensive national health system sets us apart from the other industrialized nations and we see the results in markedly increased costs and poor health outcomes.

Current expectations are high. People are craving change. For decades, reliance on the market and efforts to patch together a system using a public and private mix have failed to guarantee quality health care to every person in America. The reliance on the market dates back to the 1960s when there was a strong belief that America was so different from the other nations that our uniquely American market would solve our health care problems. We were wrong then and it is disappointing to see us continue to cling to this idea. This is not the time for more tinkering, yet that is what we are seeing. This is the time to step back and look at the big picture.

The health care market has produced a situation in which private health insurers rake in obscene profits while millions of Americans suffer from a lack of needed care. We are ranked the worst of 19 industrialized nations in terms of preventable deaths, over 101,000 each year. We have the highest infant and maternal mortalities. Health care is rationed based upon ability to pay. Patients have to wait months to get in to see a doctor and many patients never even make it through the door. We are the country that provides little in terms of employment security and support compared to other nations, yet we tie health insurance to employment. As a result, when people become ill and cannot work or when people lose their jobs because of the economic downturn, they lose their health insurance. There are an estimated 14,000 people losing their jobs every day at present. This means that when our people are most vulnerable, they are the least protected. We are the only nation in which people hold bake sales in order to pay for lifesaving treatment. We are the only nation that allows millions of people to go into bankruptcy because of medical debt.

In 1809, 200 years ago, Thomas Jefferson said, “The care of human life and happiness, not their destruction, is the legitimate responsibility of good government.” It is time to end the destruction of human life in this nation. We have a moral imperative to create a health system that provides health care to all people. Senator Kennedy, I know that you and others who are seated here today understand this and hold this same belief.

The briefing paper put forth by this committee contains reform ideas that would improve health outcomes if they were part of a national system. However, the current reforms will not reach the goals of providing affordable high quality care for all people in America. These reforms will not be universal and will increase health care costs. I have outlined the reasons for this in my submitted testimony..."

maybe I'll try and find the sections.

Thanks and

:hi:

:hi: back!

:banghead:

Wonderful. Thank you for posting this.

sometimes those 24 hours goes by quickly, other times they last for days.

:evilgrin:


But see this thread as well, could still use a knr :)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7659520&mesg_id=7659520


Direct link to liveblog ...
http://www.correntewire.com/national_medicare_all_campaign#comment-form

Sun, 02/07/2010 - 1:11pm — margaret_flowers

"We have been working this past year to get congress and the white house to include single payer/medicare for all in the debate. Our voices have been excluded. It is clear that we will need to create a social movement and elect peopple who will stand up for Medicare for all. I welcome your ideas on this and I am happy to answer questions about what has been happening in health care reform this past year.


sorry for being late - i'm new to this!
margaret"

how many Americans have to be arrested or die before this broken for profit system is addressed. And putting the insurance executives and their lawyers at the table is the root of the problem and will never address affordable healthcare for all.

and those who get media time to support the idea ... if we are to move in that direction anytime soon. Otherwise it will take much longer.

Just imagine ... but from what I read the policy was already decided in 2007.

:(

http://www.correntewire.com/national_medicare_all_campaign#comment-162752

By margaret_flowers on Sun, 02/07/2010 - 1:25pm

"You are correct that the public option was a huge distraction which split the single payer supporters. The damage was tremendous. Imagine how far the single payer movement could have come if we had the resources that the public option groups had..."

er people under the table as if they did not exist. No members of congress were, for the most part SILENT. They are just as guilty as the WH is.

some members of Congress who had supported Medicare for All decided to follow the lead of the President, that was not a good move IMO.

Again - welcome.

:)