Give the Gift of Health Care
This #GivingTuesday we should not forget that 20 million Americans are at grave risk of having their health coverage yanked away. We at Citizen Action of Wisconsin, working with top health advocates from across the country, are planning an unprecedented campaign to sound the alarm bells and spark the kind of intense public backlash that can stop Donald Trump and Congressional Republicans in their tracks. Join us now by giving to our tax-deductible Citizen Action’s Health Care Emergency Fund!
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
Monday, November 28, 2016
Sunday, November 27, 2016
Marin IJ Readers’ Forum for Nov. 27
Marin IJ Readers’ Forum for Nov. 27
Love this LTE in this CA paper:
"We need it as soon as possible, starting in California and leading to a national health program based on the Medicare model — improved and expanded Medicare for all, cradle to grave, sperm to worm.
Everybody in, nobody out.
A huge risk pool that can cover everyone with great benefits, including dental and vision, paid for with a modest tax on individual income and business payroll (like Medicare), replacing all the unpredictable, escalating expenses we pay now.
Obamacare sent us some long overdue basic reforms, but forgot to get rid of the private insurers in the middle, which provide nothing we need and are there only to take a 30 percent cut and limit our care.'
— Ellen Karel, Corte Madera
Love this LTE in this CA paper:
"We need it as soon as possible, starting in California and leading to a national health program based on the Medicare model — improved and expanded Medicare for all, cradle to grave, sperm to worm.
Everybody in, nobody out.
A huge risk pool that can cover everyone with great benefits, including dental and vision, paid for with a modest tax on individual income and business payroll (like Medicare), replacing all the unpredictable, escalating expenses we pay now.
Obamacare sent us some long overdue basic reforms, but forgot to get rid of the private insurers in the middle, which provide nothing we need and are there only to take a 30 percent cut and limit our care.'
— Ellen Karel, Corte Madera
Saturday, November 26, 2016
Other view: Let's imagine Trumpcare | Editorial | chippewa.com
Other view: Let's imagine Trumpcare | Editorial | chippewa.com
Medicare for All is the answer. Take the profit hording insurance companies out from between me and my doctor. Corporate profit seeking execs / companies have no added benefit in health care - just like they would not in my access to police protection, fire dept. calls, patching that pot hole, the Armed Forces or my local public school.
Medicare for All is the answer. Take the profit hording insurance companies out from between me and my doctor. Corporate profit seeking execs / companies have no added benefit in health care - just like they would not in my access to police protection, fire dept. calls, patching that pot hole, the Armed Forces or my local public school.
Wednesday, November 23, 2016
Sunday, November 20, 2016
Saturday, November 19, 2016
Friday, November 18, 2016
Charleston Gazette-Mail | Gazette editorial: Americans pay for health care coming and going
Charleston Gazette-Mail | Gazette editorial: Americans pay for health care coming and going
"Clearly, America needs to progress to a national plan that covers everyone — a system strong enough to drive prices downward.
Health care should be a human right for all people."
"Clearly, America needs to progress to a national plan that covers everyone — a system strong enough to drive prices downward.
Health care should be a human right for all people."
Health Reform In The Trump Era: A Big Step Back, But Possibilities For Bigger Steps Forward | The Huffington Post
Health Reform In The Trump Era: A Big Step Back, But Possibilities For Bigger Steps Forward | The Huffington Post
"A few suggestions for work in the months ahead:
1. Colleagues are, more than ever, receptive to the single-payer message. Let’s talk about it in corridors, conferences, lecture halls and national meetings; use Facebook, Twitter, email and snail mail to recruit new PNHP members; and push journal editors to end their virtual blackout on single payer.
2. With Medicaid under attack, in many states we’ll need to join in its defense. But we must simultaneously declare that this halfway measure is no substitute for real reform. Let’s not repeat the error of ACA backers who tried to convince people that their health care problems had been solved. Similarly, defense of Medicare should not paper over that program’s flaws.
3. We need to help focus the anger at elites onto the real health care elites: insurance and drug firms, and corporate health care providers.
4. In the past PNHP has focused narrowly on single-payer reform, avoiding participation in most broad-based coalitions. We should reconsider that stance in the context of the broad opposition to the Trump regime, and the urgency of threats to our communities. Effective action will require coalitions that span many issues. We should participate in those that include a demand for single payer.
5. It’s time to ramp up organizing for H.R. 676. Politicians can no longer seek refuge in the fiction that health reform is a “done deal” and is working. While work for state-based reforms can provide a useful organizing tool, it cannot address the nation’s most acute health care problems, which are concentrated in states with little hope of local legislation."
"A few suggestions for work in the months ahead:
1. Colleagues are, more than ever, receptive to the single-payer message. Let’s talk about it in corridors, conferences, lecture halls and national meetings; use Facebook, Twitter, email and snail mail to recruit new PNHP members; and push journal editors to end their virtual blackout on single payer.
2. With Medicaid under attack, in many states we’ll need to join in its defense. But we must simultaneously declare that this halfway measure is no substitute for real reform. Let’s not repeat the error of ACA backers who tried to convince people that their health care problems had been solved. Similarly, defense of Medicare should not paper over that program’s flaws.
3. We need to help focus the anger at elites onto the real health care elites: insurance and drug firms, and corporate health care providers.
4. In the past PNHP has focused narrowly on single-payer reform, avoiding participation in most broad-based coalitions. We should reconsider that stance in the context of the broad opposition to the Trump regime, and the urgency of threats to our communities. Effective action will require coalitions that span many issues. We should participate in those that include a demand for single payer.
5. It’s time to ramp up organizing for H.R. 676. Politicians can no longer seek refuge in the fiction that health reform is a “done deal” and is working. While work for state-based reforms can provide a useful organizing tool, it cannot address the nation’s most acute health care problems, which are concentrated in states with little hope of local legislation."
The one thing missing from the debate over Obamacare, according to a top doctor
The one thing missing from the debate over Obamacare, according to a top doctor
".... expanded access to health insurance to millions of Americans did so without nearly enough input from the patient — or the doctor.
“Patients are getting frustrated and fearful and anxious that they can't have access to the care that's best suited for them,” Noseworthy said. “How can you have a great country if our citizens can't get access to world class health care? It's actually not a bad time to reassess.”"
".... expanded access to health insurance to millions of Americans did so without nearly enough input from the patient — or the doctor.
“Patients are getting frustrated and fearful and anxious that they can't have access to the care that's best suited for them,” Noseworthy said. “How can you have a great country if our citizens can't get access to world class health care? It's actually not a bad time to reassess.”"
Thursday, November 17, 2016
Monday, November 14, 2016
Health insurers say dialysis clinics are scamming them | Minnesota Public Radio News
Health insurers say dialysis clinics are scamming them | Minnesota Public Radio News
Another way profit driven systems cost us so much in health care. Not only the insurance companies.
Another way profit driven systems cost us so much in health care. Not only the insurance companies.
Sunday, November 13, 2016
Saturday, November 12, 2016
Tuesday, November 8, 2016
Monday, November 7, 2016
Sunday, November 6, 2016
Pharmaceutical industry gets high on fat profits - BBC News
Pharmaceutical industry gets high on fat profits - BBC News
comments from Robert Reich:
"Bloomberg reports that a federal inquiry into drug price-fixing is looking at more than a dozen companies and about two dozen drugs. I hope that inquiry expands, and results in real action.
comments from Robert Reich:
"Bloomberg reports that a federal inquiry into drug price-fixing is looking at more than a dozen companies and about two dozen drugs. I hope that inquiry expands, and results in real action.
Drug prices in the U.S. are higher than in any other advanced nation, and drugs are the fastest-growing part of the health care bill—which itself is rising at an alarming rate.
This means fat profits that come out of your pocket, both as a consumer and taxpayer. The combined profits of the 10 pharmaceutical companies in the Fortune 500 were over $35.9 billion last year -- more than the profits of all the other 490 businesses in the Fortune 500 put together.
Drug companies say the big profits are necessary to support their research in new drugs. Baloney. They’re spending far more on marketing drugs than on developing them - in some cases twice as much. Besides, profit margins take into account R&D costs.
We must regulate drug prices, like every other advanced nation. And push for a single-payer healthcare system."
Saturday, November 5, 2016
Corvallis, Ashland Cast Votes on Universal Healthcare System | The Lund Report
Corvallis, Ashland Cast Votes on Universal Healthcare System | The Lund Report
Need to watch for the Rand Corp study results planned to come out in Dec.
Need to watch for the Rand Corp study results planned to come out in Dec.
Friday, November 4, 2016
Wednesday, November 2, 2016
Big Pharma's "Stranglehold" on Congress Worsening Opioid Epidemic | Common Dreams | Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community
Big Pharma's "Stranglehold" on Congress Worsening Opioid Epidemic | Common Dreams | Breaking News & Views for the Progressive Community
"If it seems like Big Pharma has escaped accountability for its role in perpetuating the nation's deadly opioid epidemic, those suspicions are not unfounded.
"If it seems like Big Pharma has escaped accountability for its role in perpetuating the nation's deadly opioid epidemic, those suspicions are not unfounded.
According to a former top Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) official, the industry's influence over Congress has successfully quashed efforts to regulate the pharmaceutical drug market aiding an unprecedented addiction to legal drugs."
Colorado to swing — and likely miss — at fixing health care coverage
Colorado to swing — and likely miss — at fixing health care coverage
Comments on the article at the end:
Craig Brooks
NOVEMBER 2, 2016 AT 8:29 AM
Single Payer Universal Care – Medicare for All is what we need. Removing the profit gauging insurance companies from between me and my doctor is critical. Putting hospitals on a budget and overseeing them like a public utility instead of being able to “compete” with expensive equipment and cutting ER access is essential. Taking into account the TOTAL cost of our current system is needed. There are so many hidden costs that it is not a simple task. I pay premiums, deductibles, co-pays, for things not covered and I pay more because some don’t have coverage and don’t pay their bills and I pay taxes for not only the poor but also for all the government employees with coverage and now taxes pay for ACA coverage. And, that does not include the actuarial costs of not treating sick people and how the ultimate cost goes up. For profit insurance companies don’t care about that last part – taxes pay the cost of their not covering people and they only look at the profit projections for the next year or two. They don’t give a crap about health outcomes. They only care about high salaries, stock prices and dividends.
Joel Clemmer
NOVEMBER 1, 2016 AT 10:37 PM
It is really unfortunate that the author says “Putting ColoradoCare in place would double state spending overnight and give Colorado the highest income tax in the nation, making us immediately non-competitive in attracting businesses to locate in the state.” Framing the costs in this manner is at least a distortion. he fails to note the off-setting savings of premiums, co-pays, co-insurance, deductibles and care for those without insurance. Without the full picture, one thinks only of the expenses of ColoradoCare, not the savings. A kind word for this rhetorical technique would be “distortion.”
Paula
NOVEMBER 1, 2016 AT 10:29 PM
As usual, this article screams $38 billion – but does not subtract premiums, deductibles and co-pays that Colorado citizens will no longer pay. It does not subtract the Medical portion of workman’s comp that business and government will no longer pay.
Evaluate the financial impact fairly and you will see the scale tip in the other direction. Vote ColoradoCare YES!!!
Comments on the article at the end:
Craig Brooks
NOVEMBER 2, 2016 AT 8:29 AM
Single Payer Universal Care – Medicare for All is what we need. Removing the profit gauging insurance companies from between me and my doctor is critical. Putting hospitals on a budget and overseeing them like a public utility instead of being able to “compete” with expensive equipment and cutting ER access is essential. Taking into account the TOTAL cost of our current system is needed. There are so many hidden costs that it is not a simple task. I pay premiums, deductibles, co-pays, for things not covered and I pay more because some don’t have coverage and don’t pay their bills and I pay taxes for not only the poor but also for all the government employees with coverage and now taxes pay for ACA coverage. And, that does not include the actuarial costs of not treating sick people and how the ultimate cost goes up. For profit insurance companies don’t care about that last part – taxes pay the cost of their not covering people and they only look at the profit projections for the next year or two. They don’t give a crap about health outcomes. They only care about high salaries, stock prices and dividends.
Joel Clemmer
NOVEMBER 1, 2016 AT 10:37 PM
It is really unfortunate that the author says “Putting ColoradoCare in place would double state spending overnight and give Colorado the highest income tax in the nation, making us immediately non-competitive in attracting businesses to locate in the state.” Framing the costs in this manner is at least a distortion. he fails to note the off-setting savings of premiums, co-pays, co-insurance, deductibles and care for those without insurance. Without the full picture, one thinks only of the expenses of ColoradoCare, not the savings. A kind word for this rhetorical technique would be “distortion.”
Paula
NOVEMBER 1, 2016 AT 10:29 PM
As usual, this article screams $38 billion – but does not subtract premiums, deductibles and co-pays that Colorado citizens will no longer pay. It does not subtract the Medical portion of workman’s comp that business and government will no longer pay.
Evaluate the financial impact fairly and you will see the scale tip in the other direction. Vote ColoradoCare YES!!!
Tuesday, November 1, 2016
Trump Has No Health Care Plan; Clinton's Might Work - The Atlantic
Trump Has No Health Care Plan; Clinton's Might Work - The Atlantic
I really like how the author lays out in simple terms what the health care issue is all about.
An example: "No approach to getting health care for everyone is ideal. Getting sick isn’t ideal. None of this is ideal. But an every-person-for-herself approach is a guaranteed failure when going up against corporations who will offer care on their terms. What if a pool that’s run by elected officials is the only way to create an entity that has no incentive to deny our medical claims? No incentive to charge us as much as they possibly can?"
I really like how the author lays out in simple terms what the health care issue is all about.
An example: "No approach to getting health care for everyone is ideal. Getting sick isn’t ideal. None of this is ideal. But an every-person-for-herself approach is a guaranteed failure when going up against corporations who will offer care on their terms. What if a pool that’s run by elected officials is the only way to create an entity that has no incentive to deny our medical claims? No incentive to charge us as much as they possibly can?"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)