tagged w/ Dennis Kucinich
-
WHOO! The Democrats in Congress passed a bill! Healthcare for all! Awesome! Right? ...right?WHOO! The Democrats in Congress passed a bill! Healthcare for all! Awesome! Right?... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
7 days ago
- |
-
We shouldn't have been surprised. I'm right now working on a book that exposes anew our corporate-owned government, which didn't change in any way when hope was reported to have prevailed a year ago. The new day in Washington when lobbyists would supposedly take backseats to citizen needs became instead The Washington Post calling last summer the Summer Of The Lobbyist. We're seeing now that insurance industry lobbyists did their work well.
Thus, I wouldn't get too excited about health care reform just yet. The word "historic" has been liberally tossed around everywhere since the House bill passed by five votes on Saturday night, but commentators in other countries noticed before the bill even made it to vote that it's ludicrously light fare compared to citizen health coverage in other countries.
The House bill -- which is more ambitious than the Senate bill -- does almost nothing to contain runaway health care costs. Those are what threaten to consume one-fifth of the US gross domestic product in coming years. Health insurance companies are surely laughing themselves silly as the bill would force people to buy insurance from them. The remnant of the public insurance option is pretty barebones, so those unable to pay for insurance won't be well covered.
Nothing is law yet and it remains to be seen if reform will get through, but even if it does, it's almost guaranteed to turn into another bonanza for health corporations, more national debt, and little improvement in access to health care. That's the worst of all combinations, but seems to so often be the one we get. More spending with real benefits would be good, less spending and thus less collected in taxes so we have more left over to get our own coverage would be good, but more spending and little new coverage is not good.
I'm afraid this will end the way so many issues end, with corporations winning while citizens get screwed.
In my opinion, the best summary of what's wrong with the ramshackle attempt to reform American health care was presented by Ohio Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich in his article, Why I Voted No. I recommend that you read it. At just 770 words long, it's worth your time.We shouldn't have been surprised. I'm right now working on a book that exposes anew... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
12 days ago
- |
-
There were plenty of cowardly votes in the House last night but there was only one truly brave one. The unsung hero of the night was Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich. Despite enormous pressure to support H.R. 3962, Rep. Kucinich did the right thing and voted 'no'. Unlike the Blue Dog votes against the bill, he did it for all the right reasons.
In a principled and practical statement, Rep. Kucinich said what a growing number of progressives have realized as we've watched real health care reform be compromised again and again.
During the debate, when the interests of insurance companies would have been effectively challenged, that challenge was turned back. The "robust public option" which would have offered a modicum of competition to a monopolistic industry was whittled down from an initial potential enrollment of 129 million Americans to 6 million. An amendment which would have protected the rights of states to pursue single-payer health care was stripped from the bill at the request of the Administration. Looking ahead, we cringe at the prospect of even greater favors for insurance companies.
Personally, I supported President Obama in the primaries and the election but do not support him on this corporate giveaway built on broken campaign promises. I voted for the Barack Obama who opposed the individual mandate, who said the negotiations would be televised on C-SPAN and who campaigned against backroom deals with PhARMA.
Conservatives have expressed outrage for months about the way the health care bill was handled. Their anti-government anger is misplaced because the lets the insurances and drug companies who really helped drive this bill off the hook. But I understand their sense that this bill was passed despite the people. [cont'd at link]There were plenty of cowardly votes in the House last night but there was only one... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
12 days ago
- |
-
Well, the House health reform bill -- known to Republicans as the Government Takeover -- finally passed after one of Congress's longer, less enlightening debates. Two stalwarts of the single-payer movement split their votes; John Conyers voted for it; Dennis Kucinich against. Kucinich was right.
Conservative rhetoric notwithstanding, the House bill is not a "government takeover." I wish it were. Instead, it enshrines and subsidizes the "takeover" by the investor-owned insurance industry that occurred after the failure of the Clinton reform effort in 1994. To be sure, the bill has a few good provisions (expansion of Medicaid, for example), but they are marginal. It also provides for some regulation of the industry (no denial of coverage because of pre-existing conditions, for example), but since it doesn't regulate premiums, the industry can respond to any regulation that threatens its profits by simply raising its rates. The bill also does very little to curb the perverse incentives that lead doctors to over-treat the well-insured. And quite apart from its content, the bill is so complicated and convoluted that it would take a staggering apparatus to administer it and try to enforce its regulations.
What does the insurance industry get out of it? Tens of millions of new customers, courtesy of the mandate and taxpayer subsidies. And not just any kind of customer, but the youngest, healthiest customers -- those least likely to use their insurance. The bill permits insurers to charge twice as much for older people as for younger ones. So older under-65's will be more likely to go without insurance, even if they have to pay fines. That's OK with the industry, since these would be among their sickest customers. (Shouldn't age be considered a pre-existing condition?)
[cont'd at link]Well, the House health reform bill -- known to Republicans as the Government Takeover... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
12 days ago
- |
-
The Affordable Health Care for America Act was approved by the U.S. House Saturday night with overwhelming support from progressive Democrats who serve in the chamber and from a president who was nominated and elected with the enthusiastic support of progressive voters.
But that does not mean that informed and engaged progressives are entirely enthusiastic about the measure.
In fact, some are openly and explicitly opposed to it -- among them former Congressional Progressive Caucus chair Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, and CPC member Eric Massa, D-New York, both of whom broke with the majority of their fellow Democrats to vote "no" when the House approved the measure by a narrow 220-215 vote Saturday.
How can this be?
Isn't this a fight between Democrats and Republicans? Between reforming liberals and tea-party conservatives?
How can there possible be any subtlety or nuance to this debate?
Well, of course, the debate over this 1,900-page behemoth of a bill is more complicated than the easy spin of political insiders -- and media cheering sections -- would have Americans believe.
Key interest groups, such as the National Organization for Women, and key congressmen who have been long-term supporters of reform, such as single-payer backers Massa and Kucinich, argue that the bill is not the cure for what ails the U.S. health care system.
Indeed, they suggest, the bill as it is currently constructed could make a bad situation worse.
Many sincere progressives in the House, and outside of it, chose to back the bill as the best that could be gotten. Others supported it on the theory that flaws could be fixed in the Senate and in the reconciliation of the House and Senate bills.
But those repairs will only be made if activists are conscious of what ails this bill.
For that reason, even supporters of the House legislation would be wise to consider the criticisms of it by groups that advocate for the rights of women, patient advocates, unions and some of the most progressive members of the House.
Here are six smart progressive complaints about the House bill: [con't at link]The Affordable Health Care for America Act was approved by the U.S. House Saturday... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
12 days ago
- |
-
ELISABETH BENJAMIN: Well, the problem with the $900 billion number is that it actually means that we don’t have enough to subsidize coverage for folks. If we did a robust public option, we’d grab $80 billion. It now seems like that’s off the table. So we need to find the money to have enough subsidies for working people.
Why is that? Well, let’s do the math. So you have a family of three at 300 percent of poverty. They earn $55,000 a year. They spend $15,000 in taxes. They spend $14,000 in, you know, rent. They spend $20,000 on childcare. They spend $7,000 on food. And guess what? They’re already in debt. If you add in healthcare costs, which then they’re—even with the subsidies, they’re really in debt. And if they have a medical catastrophe, even with the caps—which is great that they’re adding, in health reform, caps on your maximum out-of-pocket exposure—you’re going to be in debt at the end of the year. And that’s the problem. They don’t have enough money to actually subsidize people, unless they really drive down insurance costs. The only way you really drive down insurance costs is through a public plan, or the other alternative is not even try to do this complicated thing, building on the current employer-driven structure.
DR. OLIVER FEIN: Right. And what we propose is essentially a Medicare-for-all program, right? Obama had a choice, really. He could have decided to build on what we have, correct. That’s what he said he was doing. But he went down the pathway of subsidizing what I think is a defective product at this point: private health insurance. He could have gone down the pathway of taking Medicare, probably the most popular health insurance program in the United States, and saying we should spread that to all people in the United States.
And if he had done that, we feel that studies show that you wouldn’t have to increase the cost to the middle class. The overall cost to the system actually would be a savings of close to $400 billion per year, mind you. And we’ve got that money, for instance, because we’re spending $1 trillion in Iraq and Afghanistan, OK, per year. So we have the possibility, it seems to me, if we went in the direction of a Medicare-for-all program, to really make this affordable to all people in the United States.
Now, Anthony Weiner from New York—
[more at link]ELISABETH BENJAMIN: Well, the problem with the $900 billion number is that it actually... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
23 days ago
- |
-
On MSNBC, The Ed Shultz Show (October 28) Congressman Kucinich stated: It's time to re-double our efforts to insist on a robust public option, that is the least we can do since the single-payer option has been taken out of the bill, leaving negotiated rates, a trigger - capitulating to insurance companies. Without a robust public option the poor will pay more, the government will pay more, ending up in a larger bailout to the insurance industry. Your contribution will empower our efforts to fight for the single-payer, not for profit health care bill, H.R. 676.On MSNBC, The Ed Shultz Show (October 28) Congressman Kucinich stated: It's time to... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
24 days ago
- |
-
The Obama administration’s position that the government can force mobile carriers to hand over cellphone tower location information on their customers without a warrant is wrong, two legal scholars say.
"Because CSLI acquisition is hidden, indiscriminate and intrusive, and because it reveals information over a period of time, it should be subject to the highest level of Fourth Amendment oversight (the same procedures used for wiretapping and video surveillance)," the scholars wrote late Friday.
The scholars are Susan Freiwald, of the USF School of Law, and Peter Swire, of Ohio State University.
Their words, published by the American Constitution Society, came a month after the Justice Department made its claim in a little-noticed case that the Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures did not apply.
Most Americans have or will carry a mobile phone in their lifespan, so the outcome could have wide-ranging privacy ramifications. Smartphones, like the iPhone, use cell-tower information to power geo-location applications like Google Maps.
In a case pending before the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the government maintains it can require federal judges to order mobile phone companies to release historical cell-tower information of a phone number without probable cause — the standard required for a search warrant.
While judges have differed on the issue, the resulting evidence can be used in a criminal prosecution. The case on appeal concerns a Pennsylvania judge who rejected the government’s position in a drug prosecution that the new administration inherited.
Mobile-phone providers keep cell-site information for up to 18 months. Historical cell-site location information includes the tower connected at the beginning of a call and at the end of the call. The government does not claim a warrantless right to cell-site information for future calls, only for calls already dialed.
"Cellular providers could, if they wanted, keep track of your cell phone’s location every seven seconds," the scholars wrote, "because your phone ‘registers’ that often with the nearest tower."The Obama administration’s position that the government can force mobile carriers to... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
24 days ago
- |
-
Dennis Kucinich is appearing on Jay Leno tonight!
Check your local listings!
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
1 month ago
- |
-
Do you support:
Green Jobs?
Direct Taxes on Pollution?
Localizing our agriculture?
Ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Cutting the Pentagon Budget?
Taxing the Rich (who can afford it) instead of the middle class and poor?
Legalizing marijuana use and other victimless 'crimes'?
Single Payer health insurance?
Ending the WTO and NAFTA and returning to Bilateral trade agreements based on workers rights and environmental quality principals rather than a race to the bottom?
Then the Green Party is for you!
Want to keep up to day with Green Party goings on? Then join this group!Do you support:
Green Jobs?
Direct Taxes on Pollution?
Localizing our agriculture?... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
2 months ago
- |
-
Dear Friends,
It is said one should not ask how sausage or laws are made. Are you concerned about a public option? Let me share with you some insight about health care legislation which may not be good for your health.
A lesson in politics. The Kucinich Prediction: Here's what's going to happen ...
1. House will make a big deal about keeping/putting a public option in HR3200 because it competes with insurance companies and will keep insurance rates low.
2. The White House will refer to the President's speech last week where he spoke favorably of the public option.
3. The Senate will kill the competitive public option in favor of non-competitive "co-ops". Senate leaders like Kent Conrad have said the votes to pass a public option were never there in the Senate.
4. The bill will come to a House-Senate Conference Committee without the public option.
5. House Democrats will be told to support the conference report on the legislation to support the President.
6. The bill will pass, not with a "public option" but with a private mandate requiring 30 million uninsured to buy private health insurance (if one doesn't already have it). If you are broke, you may get a subsidy. If you are not broke, you will get a fine if you do not purchase insurance.
This legislative sausage will be celebrated as a new breakthrough and will be packaged as health insurance reform. However, the bill may require a Surgeon General's warning label: Your Money or Your Life!
The bill that Congress passes may pale in comparison to the bill that millions of Americans will get every month/year for having or not having private health insurance.
It will take four years for the new legislation to go into effect. During that time we are going to build a constituency of millions in support of real health care, a constituency which will be recognized and a cause which is right and just: Health Care as a Civil Right.Dear Friends,
It is said one should not ask how sausage or laws are made. Are you... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
2 months ago
- |
-
I remember waking up, getting ready for English class. It was my second week of my freshman year of college. Before leaving to catch the bus to the other campus, I was checking the primussucks.com bullitan board, as was my habit at the time. There were several posts about the "airline accident" in NYC, and then suddenly, there were posts of a second plane hitting. It was probably a few minutes after 9am. My class didn't start until 10:30am.
I ran downstairs to see what was going on on the news. I sat there watching in disbeleif. I had become friends with the RD of the dorm, and I ran and got her, because I figured she ought to know.
She and I sat there watching as the towers burned. I remember watching as the first tower fell in total disbelief. I already knew at that time that a steel structure building had never collapsed due to fire. I imagined all the people's lives inside being extinguished in a horrible instant, and my could feel my heart fall to the floor with the tower.
Cookie, the RD turned to me and said, "I would hate to be president right now." I looked at her in disbelief, and asked if she was kidding. I looked back at the television and said, looking into the smoke, "for at least a year after something like this, you could pass whatever laws you wanted to. If he wants to the Senate to declare war, he can declare war on whomever he wants. Nobody will question the President during a crisis like this."
Looking back, I don't know how I knew that. I'm not a Machiavellian person myself. Studying history, probably, knowing how we interned the Japanese after Pearl Harbor. Knowing how we had the Red Scare during the 1950s. I was too young at the time to understand the Gulf War, but I knew enough by the time Clinton was in office that I was against Clinton bombing Iraqi aspirin factories during the Monica Lewinsky scandal as a distraction. I had followed the 2000 election quite closely as a Senior in high school, watched as it was stolen, and was convinced that G.W. Bush wanted to declare war on somebody. I even have a letter I was assigned to write myself as a Sophomore in College writing to my self as a Senior about what the future holds for me. It scares me a little now, but I said in that letter, half joking, "with George W Bush in office, we're sure to be at war with somebody by now, for no good reason." There was an inevitability I felt about it. Perhaps I was just that jaded.
Sitting there watching as the remaining tower burned, both of us not knowing what to do, Cookie looked back at me after my comment with tears and bit of anger in her eyes, visibly upset by what I'd said, and understandably. She said then, what I would come to agree with in the following October, when the congress passed the USAPATRIOT act. She said then, sitting next to me, "I hope you're wrong."
I wish I had been too.
[full article at link]I remember waking up, getting ready for English class. It was my second week of my... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
2 months ago
- |
-
Dennis Kucinich on the Ed Shultz show August 19th
Hells yes.
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
3 months ago
- |
-
HEALTH CARE WANTED: DEAD OR ALIVE
The masquerade is over!
The "public option" is dead.
Health care reform is now a private option: WHICH FOR PROFIT INSURANCE COMPANY DO YOU WANT? You have to choose. And you have to pay. If you have a low income, under HR3200 government will subsidize the private insurance companies and you will still have to pay premiums, co-pays and deductibles.
The Administration plan requires that everyone must have health insurance, so it is delivering tens of millions of new "customers" to the insurance companies. Health care? Not really. Insurance care! Absolutely. Cost controls? No chance.
You will next hear talk about "co-ops." The truth is that insurance company campaign contributions have co-opted the public interest.
I need your help to spread the word and rally the nation around true health care reform which covers everyone and maintains fiscal integrity without breaking our nation's bank! Your contribution will empower our efforts to continue to fight for the single-payer, not-for-profit health care bill, HR676 "Medicare for All," which I co-authored with Rep. John Conyers. The bill now has 85 sponsors in the House.
The hotly-debated HR3200, the so-called "health care reform" bill, is nothing less than corporate welfare in the guise of social welfare and reform. It is a convoluted mess. The real debate which we should be having is not occurring.
Removing the "public option" from a public bill paid for by public money is not in the public interest. What is left is a "private option" paid for with public money. Why should public money be spent on a private option which does not guarantee 100% coverage nor have any cost controls? A true public option would provide 30% savings immediately which would then cover the 1/3rd of the population who presently have no health care.
Unfortunately, under HR3200, the Government is choosing winners and losers in the private sector; proposing to spend public funds on subsidizing insurance companies who make money not providing health care. This process will insure only the expansion of profits. Gone is the debate over cost.
As a result of current negotiations, the Medicare Part D rip-off will continue for another decade, further fleecing senior citizens. Drug importation has been dropped, so no inexpensive drugs can be accessed from other nations.
Instead we are told the pharmaceutical companies will accept a 2% cut in the growth rate of their profits - they call this cost control!
If the matter were not so serious, it would be farcical: The executive branch pretends that the proposed health care reforms are something they are not. The legislation is being attacked for something it is not. Congressional leadership and the White House defend the legislation, pretending it actually is the very proposal that is being attacked. But it is not.
A commonsense government health care reform policy would insure that every single American has full access to health care by expanding Medicare to cover everyone under a Single Payer System. We are already paying for a universal standard of care, it is just we are not getting it.
I need your help to spread the word and rally the nation around true health care reform which covers everyone and maintains fiscal integrity without subsidizing insurance and pharmaceutical companies and breaking our nation's bank!
My voice in Congress will continue to challenge the special interests who do not want "single-payer" to succeed. I need you to join me in combating the special and corporate interests who spend millions to try to win this Congressional seat. With your help WE will win again. With your help I will continue to represent your concerns, be YOUR VOICE in the United States Congress, and be the voice for health care for all Americans!
With your help, we can accomplish ANYTHING in America. Persistence, dedication, truth and courage will lead the way and win out in the end.
Thank you,
Dennis KucinichHEALTH CARE WANTED: DEAD OR ALIVE
The masquerade is over!
The "public option"... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
3 months ago
- |
-
The Obama administration admitted last week it promised to oppose proposals to let the government negotiate drug prices and extract additional savings from drug companies. In return, drug companies reportedly pledged to reduce costs by up to $80 billion. The White House has tried to back off the reported agreements, but the drug industry says it expects the White House to uphold its pledge. We speak to former presidential candidate and longtime consumer advocate Ralph Nader.
[includes rush transcript, video at link]The Obama administration admitted last week it promised to oppose proposals to let the... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
3 months ago
- |
-
This short 9min film is a reader's digest of the book by the same name by author Douglas Rushkoff.
Douglas Rushkoff is the author of ten books on media, technology, and society, including Cyberia, Media Virus, Coercion, Nothing Sacred, Get Back in the Box, and the novel Ecstasy Club.
He made the PBS Frontline documentaries Merchants of Cool, The Persuaders, and the upcoming Digital Nation. He is the host of the WFMU radio show The MediaSquat, and he will be teaching the New School University this Fall.
In Life Inc., award-winning writer, documentary filmmaker, and scholar Douglas Rushkoff traces how corporations went from a convenient legal fiction to the dominant fact of contemporary life. Indeed as Rushkoff shows, most Americans have so willingly adopted the values of corporations that they're no longer even aware of it.
http://www.lifeincorporated.netThis short 9min film is a reader's digest of the book by the same name by author... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
4 months ago
- |
-
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: I want to cover everybody. Now, the truth is that unless you have a—what’s called a single-payer system, in which everybody’s automatically covered, then you’re probably not going to reach every single individual, because there’s always going to be somebody out there who thinks they’re indestructible and doesn’t want to get healthcare, doesn’t bother getting healthcare, and then, unfortunately, when they get hit by a bus, end up in the emergency room and the rest of us have to pay for it.
But that’s not the overwhelming majority of Americans. The overwhelming majority of Americans want healthcare, but millions of them can’t afford it.
So the plan that has been—that I’ve put forward and that what we’re seeing in Congress would cover, the estimates are at least 97 to 98 percent of Americans. There might still be people left out there who, even though there’s an individual mandate, even though they are required to purchase health insurance, might still not get it or, despite a lot of subsidies, are still in such dire straits that it’s still hard for them to afford it, and we may end up giving them some sort of hardship exemption.PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: I want to cover everybody. Now, the truth is that unless you... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
4 months ago
- |
-
I watched this interview with Bob Bennett saying that there is Zero % chance of passing a healthcare reform bill before August.
The most important thing that he talked about is changing the paradigm of care from:
The present system is that doctors are compensated for what they do to you rather than what they do for you. If a doctor keeps you healthy, he doesn't get paid. But if he cuts into you, or sticks pins into you, or runs you through a machine, then he gets paid for those procedures. We have to change that paradigm, and everybody that has worked on changing that paradigm, whether it's Safeway and their self insured program, they have demonstrated that you can turn the cost curve downwards, you can save money, and increase the quality of the healthcare you get, regardless of where you live. By changing the focus and compensating doctors more for keeping patients healthy.
Although I personally don't agree in allowing Capitalism to continue to have free reign over healthcare, I think that the single payer proposal by Congressman Kucinich HR676 is a better proposal, it should be tailored to include what Bennett proposes above. Rewarding doctors more for keeping patients healthy, than for increasing his earnings by doing more procedures. It makes sense.
What do you all think?I watched this interview with Bob Bennett saying that there is Zero % chance of... more
-
-
jubal
-
added this
-
4 months ago
- |
-
[video at link]
Welcome to Democracy Now!, Congressman Kucinich. What exactly did you get passed?
AMY GOODMAN: And explain exactly what you mean by the single-payer plan that, state by state, it could be adopted.
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, Medicare is a single-payer plan. It’s the government pays the bills. Now, government doesn’t own all the hospitals under the legislation that I wrote with John Conyers, HR 676, that is co-sponsored by eighty-five members of Congress. Government would essentially be the person or the institution that pays the bills.
Right now, we have a system with 50 million people uninsured, another 50 million underinsured, where you have thousands of different insurance companies that are involved in jacking up administrative costs. One out of every three dollars goes for the activities of the for-profit system, for corporate profit, stock option, executive salary, advertising, marketing, and cost of paperwork. You eliminate that $800 billion a year in overhead, and you have enough money to be able to meet the needs of all people in this country. And when you eliminate the overhead at a state level, you can meet the needs of people of a state level.
AMY GOODMAN: And so, what is happening right now, Congressman Kucinich? The latest, the possibility that the bill will not be passed by August, which some have taken to mean it’s going to give more time for Republicans and the Blue Dog Democrats to water it down. But they’re not even with the public plan. I’d like you to explain what is being offered, even coming close to the idea of single payer.
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, it’s not close to the idea of single payer. It’s mandating that people buy insurance. And it’s telling insurance companies they have to sell insurance. Well, you know who wins in that deal.
The fact of the matter is, this debate is all skewed right now. You know, there are—both political parties are in trouble on the issue of healthcare. Our political system is failing the American people, and it’s a bipartisan affair. So, what we have right now is a mishmash, which is being offered up as reform. Well, no wonder it’s in trouble from all sides.
I mean, if people were offered a clear choice of a single-payer plan or not and told what the advantages are of having the government paying the bills, eliminating the overhead, enabling all Americans to have not just basic coverage with doctor of choice, but vision care, dental care, mental healthcare, prescription drugs, long-term care, all covered, if people knew that was the choice they could have, there wouldn’t even—there wouldn’t be much of a debate at all.
But we’re falling back on old ideological arguments, when the fact of the matter is the insurance companies are running Washington and we have to break their hold. And that’s why the single-payer amendment that I offer that gives states an option is a small step in the direction of trying to give states the ability to be able to determine their own destiny, and then hopefully America will be able to see in these laboratories of states that we can have a single-payer plan that can save people money and protect people’s economic security and their health. Healthcare is a basic right. We still don’t hear of that talked about in the major debate here in Washington about the bill that is being presented.
[more at link][video at link]
Welcome to Democracy Now!, Congressman Kucinich. What exactly did... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
4 months ago
- |
-
[FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE]
The House Education and Labor Committee approved the Kucinich Amendment by a vote of 27-19, with 14 Democrats and 13 Republicans voting yes.
The amendment propels the growing single payer health care movement at the state level. There are at least ten states which have active single payer efforts in their legislatures. They are California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Washington. The amendment mandates a single payer state will receive the right to waive the application of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), which has in the past been used to nullify efforts to expand state or local government health care.
Under the Kucinich Amendment a state's application for a waiver from ERISA is granted automatically if the state has signed into law a single payer plan. With the amendment, for the first time, the state single payer health care option is shielded from an ERISA-based legal attack. Now that the underlying bill has been passed, as amended, by the full committee, we must make sure that Congress knows that we want the provision kept in the bill at final passage!
The state single payer option was one of five major amendments which I obtained support to get included in HR3200. One amendment brings into standard coverage for the first time complementary and alternative medicine, (integrative medicine). Another amendment drives down the cost of prescription drugs by ending pharmaceutical industry's sharp practices manipulating physician prescribing habits. An amendment stops the insurance industry from increasing premiums at the time when people are not permitted to change health plans; and finally an amendment imposing a requirement on insurance companies that they disclose the cost of advertising, marketing and executive compensation expenses (which generally divert money from patient care).[FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE]
The House Education and Labor Committee approved the... more
-
-
asherp
-
added this
-
4 months ago
- |
