We agree with Hillary Clinton & Barack Obama, we support the progressive values they support, and we share their dedication to making this nation better... That's why we're Democrats! :-)
I just found this at TalkLeft. After all the hell progressive/feminist activists raised over needed family planning funds being cut from the economic stimulus package, President Obama may be listening to our concerns after all. And better yet, he may be willing to do something about it!
Women's health advocates were dismayed this week to see the removal of family-planning aid from Congress' economic recovery bill after a push by Republicans to politicize a generally cut-and-dry issue of Medicaid waivers. [...] But the dismay may not last long. A source present at today's White House signing ceremony for the Lilly Ledbetter bill tells me that President Obama gave assurances that the family planning aid would be done soon -- perhaps as soon as next week, when the House is set to take up a spending bill that would keep the government funded until October.
But hey, you know me better than to think I'll just "hope" that Congress just magically includes this in the spending bill next week. No, we need to make it happen!
So what can we do to ensure working-class women can access the health care they need? We talk to President Obama! We callCongress! We take action to make it happen!
It's a shame that so many women have been denied family planning health care for the last eight years simply because Dumbya Bush and his Rethuglican Party have been vehemently opposed to any and all forms of contraception. But now that those @ssclowns are out of office, we have a chance to fix this problem and fully fund the health care that so many women need. Please join me in asking the Democratic leaders in Washington to stand up for the many women who helped put them into office.
If you're like me, you must be quite irritated right now that President Obama & Democratic Congressional leaders caved into the radical right in tossing needed aid to poor women out of the economic stimulus bill. Well, guess what? We can do something about this travesty!
Support the Unplanned Pregnancy Prevention Bill
Target: U.S. Congress
Sponsored by: National Partnership for Women & Families
With the goal of moving reproductive rights to the top of the legislative agenda in the 111th Congress, Reps. Diana DeGette, (D-CO) and Louise Slaughter, (D-N.Y), and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), have reintroduced "Prevention First" legislation.
The measure's goals are lofty - to tackle the unacceptably high rate of unplanned pregnancies in the U.S. Currently, half of pregnancies are unintended and half of those end in abortion. The bill would tackle the problem from several angles, by:
* Increasing family planning funding,
* Ending insurance discrimination against women,
* Improving awareness about emergency contraception, and
* Requiring programs to focus on medically accurate sex education.
If we want to reduce the number of abortions in this country, the path is clear - empower women to prevent unintended pregnancies through education and access to contraception. Please sign our petition and urge your elected officials to sign onto this important legislation today!
As we all know now, the economy is the one issue on the top of our minds. The US has now been in a recession for a year, and there are still concerns that we may slip into a depression.
Already, President-Elect Barack Obama has said he wants to take action on the economy as soon as he's sworn into office. But will he support the real solutions that our economy needs? Well, that's where we step in.
Now is the time for us to ensure that Obama's campaign promises come true. And now with everyone worried about the economy, now is the time to institute the real reforms and investments that are needed to fix what's broken. So where should we begin?
How about the one problem that is actually making our businesses less competitive? And the problem that is squeezing the working class, as people pay so much for so little? Yes, I'm talking about health care. Believe it or not, instituting universal health care can stimulate our economy. With businesses spending less on health care expenses, they can afford to hire more workers and produce more product. And with individuals spending less on inadequate health care, they can have more livable income. We must make universal health care happen, as this can do plenty to improve our people's and our economy's health.
Another great way for us to stimulate the economy will be to invest in infrastructure. And if we want to solve the climate crisis and fix our energy problem while also stimulating our economy, we should start building our green economy infrastructure. Think about it. We need new American jobs, and we need renewable energy. So why not build the solar panels and wind turbines and geothermal plants here so we can accomplish both? Contrary to what the "conventional wisdom" says, good environmental policy can actually go hand in hand with good economic policy. And right now, we need both for the new jobs and the investment. Blue Green Alliance gets it, and so should the new Administration.
And finally, no economy functions properly without a functioning middle class. And for far too long, the corporate right has attacked the middle class. We need to change this, and we can begin by ending the assault on the unions that helped create the American middle class. We must ensure that the Employee Free Choice Act becomes law, so that workers will once again be able to choose to form unions. We also must reform the global trade regime to make "free trade" fair as well. Our trade policies must be fair to our workers so they can keep their jobs, but we also must make sure that they are fair to the workers in the developing world. After all, how good is "free trade" if half the world can't afford it?
So there you have it, a more well-rounded economic rescue plan. We need to remember that Wall Street "rescue funds" and Detroit automaker loans are only part of the solution, and so do the incoming President and Congress. Please tell President-Elect Obama to fulfill his pledge to us, and please ask your members of Congress to do the same. They promised change we can believe in, and now's the time for that change to be delivered.
OK. It looks like Daschle's coming back to DC, this time in the Obama Administration. I'm OK with it, I guess. And if this results in successful universal health care legislation in 2009, then I'll be happy.
Sen. Max Baucus (D-Montana), Chair of the Senate Finance Committee, has released his health care plan that he plans to push in his committee and work with Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Massachusetts), Chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions Committee, on refining.
The bad news: There aren't too many details on financing.
The good news: So far, the plan looks an awful lot like the plan advocated by our favorite Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-New York) during the Presidential Primary Season. For one, the plan has a requirement that everyone be covered. And as we all learned some months back, the ONLY way a health care plan can truly be "universal" is that everyone be covered.
Also, there are some extra goodies on lowering costs & improving technology. So far, the news on the health care front looks good. If we can get a plan passed that covers everyone and makes health care affordable for everyone, we can go a long way to solve the problems crippling our system today.
So what kind of health care plan do you want Congress to pass & President Obama to sign into law? How far should we go to regulate the insurance companies? How strong of a "mandate" for coverage should we have? How far should our government go in getting involved in the system?
Let's talk health care today. Consider this a wide open thread.
Don't believe me? See for yourself! In order to pay for his horribly flawed health care scheme that would have us the working-class people pay more to get less coverage, John McCain wants to cut Medicare!
Now how the hell is that "fiscally responsible"??!!
My dad is on Medicare. He was injured on the job, and he's now disabled. He relies on Medicare to see his doctors and obtain his prescription drugs. Why does John McCain want to hurt my dad so I'll have an even shittier "health" scare plan than I do now??!!
John McCain obviously doesn't have to worry about his health care. His Congressional plan is the best in the nation. But what about us working people? Why doesn't he give damn about us?
Well, John McCain can kiss the "senior vote" and the "health care vote" goodbye!
In the continuation of our "Government Fail" series, I'd like to take a moment to highlight how Senator McCain would be just as bad, if not worse, than the Bush Administration has already been in regards to health care.
What I find the most troubling, is McCain's stance on Bush's veto of the Children's Health Insurance Expansion. Bush's reason for the veto was that he felt it was a step towards "federalizing" medicine.
McCain's response to CNN's John King:
"Right call by the president.
In short, because they don't want to look like they're federalizing medicine, they have left 10 million children without health care through the vetoed expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program. What a great way to stand up for our children!
NEXT! ...
McCain is proposing a health plan that is nearly indistinguishable from President Bush's, including dislodging State insurance regulations:
McCain's plan would allow companies to offer national plans based in states that don't have requirements passed by the vast majority of other states, including emergency care, required by 44 states. "Mr. McCain would also allow people to buy insurance across state lines." [Wall Street Journal, 10/11/07]
Some of the State Mandates that would be overridden would include :
• Emergency Room Care (currently required by 44 states) • Direct Access to OB/GYN (44 states) • Diabetes (47 States) • Colorectal Cancer Screening (23 States) • Mental Health Parity (45 States) • Post-Mastectomy Breast Reconstruction (33 States) • Off-Label Prescription Drug Use (36 States) • Chiropractors (46 states) • Clinical Trials (20 States)
The McCain plan would also move away from an Employer-based system.
"The existing tax break for employer-sponsored insurance would be eliminated, taking a step away from the work-based model in place for the last half century and toward an individual market." [Wall Street Journal, 10/11/07]
Mr. McCain’s proposal to eliminate tax breaks that encourage employers to provide health insurance for their workers is very similar to one that Mr. Bush pushed last year, to little effect. The Bush plan offered a $15,000 tax deduction for families buying their own insurance, while the McCain plan would give a refundable tax credit of $5,000 to families for insurance whether or not they pay taxes. Both men opposed a 2007 bill to expand a children’s health insurance program for lower- and middle-income families.
I've shopped for insurance - I know that most comprehensive plans for a healthy individual start around $150 per month. And the price increases exponentially for those with pre-existing conditions. McCain wants to claim he's doing this for the little guy, but what little guy can afford to insure his family wihtout the breaks of a group insurance plan, such as the ones that many employers offer. While the current system isn't the best, this plan would only further disadvantage the lowest of wage earners, and give money back to the corporate monster.
And the newest piece to the puzzle - adding ideology into policy.
The Bush Administration recently floated a draft rule to the Department of Health and Human Services redefining how monies are spent. While the basis cited by the Administration was to prevent discrimination in employment based on a medical provider's aversion to abortion, it also gave some new language to what falls under the category of abortion.
The proposal defines abortion as follows: “any of the various procedures — including the prescription, dispensing and administration of any drug or the performance of any procedure or any other action — that results in the termination of the life of a human being in utero between conception and natural birth, whether before or after implantation.”
With all of McCain's quotes about America being founded on Judeo-Christian beliefs, it takes little conjecture to see where he will land on this issue.
While I can understand the point of not wanting to bar medical providers from employment based on their personal beliefs, I have to be reminded that Roe V. Wade guaranteed that the Right to Choose rested with the woman, not the doctor.
Additionally, the Hippocratic Oath in short requires a doctor to do no harm, regardless of their personal convictions. If a woman might die without an abortion, the doctor is ethically bound to perform it, regardless of their personal beliefs. Bush's plan would effectively give them a policy based exemption that is ethically and morally wrong.
Also, I'm sure I don't need to go into detail, again, about how Bush has (and McCain will further) tear away at the Ryan White CARE Act.
These are just a few examples of how, in the vein of health care, McCain would seriously be McSame, and how the Republican Controlled Government (read President Shrub) has Failed the American People.
I know I had promised to highlight a candidate with this post, but an issue has come up that has stolen my attention.
When I went to the pharmacy yesterday, I noticed a petition to the Governor and the CA State legislature trying to prevent a 10% cut in funding of the Ryan White Comprehensive AIDS Resources Emergency (CARE) Act. This enraged me, as California is only spending an average of 2 months medication costs per patient per year. Moreover, a large chunk of the funding goes to the hardest hit urban areas. In short, the LA and SF metros get over 50% of the funding, and the rest of the state is relegated to fight over the rest. While I’m all for money going where it’s needed, the earmark needs to be expanded to truly serve the population living with HIV and AIDS.
Now I know that the Ryan White CARE Act has long been a target of the GOP and fiscal conservatives, but the current funding levels are shameful. While the total amount that is earmarked for the fund seems large at $255,305,160 (FY2006 as reported by the Kaiser Family Foundation in partnership with US Dept. of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration), when you take into account there are 92,560 reported cases in the State of California (31 May, 2008, California Dept of Public Health, Office of AIDS), it boils down to an average $2758.27 per patient per year. An average month’s medication cost for someone who is taking Anti-Retroviral Therapy (HIV Meds) is around $1400.00. With the proposed 10% cutback, the average amount spent per reported case would drop to an average of $2482.44 per year.
In 2005, there was a compromise measure enacted by Congress (when reauthorizing the Ryan White CARE Act) that limited how the monies are allocated. Title’s I and II of the act are limited to spending 75% on a core set of medical services, including the AIDS Drug Assistance Program (ADAP), and places like the Center for AIDS Research, Education, and Services (CARES), and the other 25% used for “Wrap Around Services” such as housing assistance and food / meal assistance. Those levels are good for places like Sacramento, but don’t work for places like San Francisco, where donors have taken the financial burden off the clinics and the San Francisco AIDS Foundation’s medical outreach programs. In San Francisco, the SF AIDS Foundation reports that they only use an average of 60% out of the 75% medical allocation, but cannot reallocate those surplus monies to bolster their ailing non-medical assistance programs. Other agencies, such as CARES in Sacramento, are fighting to keep every dollar they get for medical care as they are severely under-funded, and are the only such agency in the California central valley.
So, in short, when I go to the Democratic Platform meeting next week, this is the issue I will bring. This is one of the many issues that need to be addressed by Congress under the Obama Administration, and one that will be kept silent as it’s not a big news maker. But thankfully for myself (and the 92,559 other reported cases of HIV and AIDS in California), I’ve got a big mouth ... and am willing to use it to effect change.
Just my 2 Cents – comments and suggestions always welcome.
Instead of being ignored, one of my pet issues has become a proverbial Third Rail of this election cycle. It has become one of a small core of issues that candidates will live or die by. However, to many of the candidates, this issue will only be important in the abstract. For myself, and millions of uninsured and under-insured Americans, this issue is not abstract ... it's an unfortunate part of life. For many of us, affordable health care is just out of reach.
Let me preface by saying I work as a Contractor for one of the largest Technical Staffing firms in the continental US. As an employee, I am offered medical coverage, which would be best characterized as ineffective. In short, the plan covers office visits at a decent co-pay . . . but that’s about it.
I’m not used to this low level of coverage. Having been in the IT field for the past decade, I’ve been accustomed to having a compensation package that includes a decent medical plan. I’m not used to having to pay retail for prescriptions. It’s a rather humbling experience when you work 40 hours per week at what most would consider a good wage, and still cannot afford your medicines. And while I’ve got a good job, having a long-term chronic condition has really opened my eyes to how the uninsured live.
It makes me wonder how we, as Americans, can allow so many of our fellow citizens to live in these deplorable conditions. We, as a society, allow our elderly to go without care due to the cost. We, as one of the richest economies, watch our children grow up without the preventive care that they so desperately need. And yet our elected representatives choose to debate rather than act. This is an issue that transcends partisanship, ethnic background, economic status, truly all the concepts we use to call each other different. This issue hits at the core of what makes us all the same … we are ALL part of this rock we call Earth, and blessed enough to be part of the idea that is America.
I’ve always mulled about this issue, but have not been very outspoken. That changed the other night when I went to karaoke at a venue here in Sacramento. I spent a few minutes talking to Alice, one of the best bartenders in the city, about this issue. She spoke of the cost of her health care, and how it’s almost too expensive for her to afford. She also lamented that her out-of-pocket costs would increase later this year as she turns 50.
She floated an idea to me that I found amazingly simple, and yet a way we can begin to effect change. I’d like to float that idea here, and hear feedback from everyone as to their impressions.
Alice’s idea was simple – to mandate that Doctors of all stripes be required to give 2-3 days per year to treating the masses. Her concept is to have health fairs in communities large and small where these doctors give away their services. As long as a financial need is demonstrated, no-one would be turned away due to the inability to pay. This would take some of the strain off the public health clinics and the Emergency Rooms, which are grossly overtaxed. This would help insure that everyone has access to quality health care at a potentially lower cost to the taxpayer. And this would ensure that we are keeping our promise to our children to give them better than we got.
Her idea is an idea of first impression, as she saw a documentary about Doctors Without Borders and thought it would be an idea that would help Americans with the health care crisis. I agree with her that it would at least help improve the situation, even if in a small way.
If nothing else, however, we need to raise the level of public debate on this issue. We need to find creative solutions coming from government, NGO’s, CBO’s and FBO’s alike to better serve the needs of our entire population. And we need to impress on our legislatures, both state and federal, that this is an issue that needs to get pulled out of the muck. We need to shed our partisan blinders and take up a truly inclusive stance. We need to come together to solve one of the toughest social issues of our day.
Just my 2 Cents – comments and suggestions welcome!
When reading certain blogs and forums I have identified four basic reasons that some Clinton supporters refuse to support Senator Obama. First, he was not democratically chosen. Second, he hasn’t officially become the nominee. Third, he doesn’t have enough experience. Fourth, a vote for Obama is a vote for sexism. Underlying all of these reasons is a myth that John McCain is moderate enough on the issues.
Today, I’m going to focus on an issue that disproportionately affects those most marginalized in society, those whom Hillary Clinton described as “invisible” to the ruling class. Today’s post is about the uninsured:
The reality, however, is that only a minority of the uninsured are either the typical Redbook reader or that nice shopkeeper down the street. Two-thirds of those without health insurance are poor or near poor, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation. And there are clear disparities in how different racial and ethnic groups are affected. Only 13 percent of non-Hispanic white Americans is uninsured, compared with 36 percent of Hispanics, 33 percent of Native Americans, 22 percent of blacks and 17 percent of Asians/Pacific Islanders.
"The problem is not that most Americans lack adequate health insurance — the vast majority of Americans have private insurance, and our government spends billions each year to provide even more," McCain has said. "The biggest problem with the American health care system is that it costs too much."
John McCain’s health care plan emphasizes using the private sector to lower health care costs and tax credits to provide buyers with more purchasing power. He would provide buyers with a $2500 refundable tax credit to “low-income” individuals to purchase their own insurance and $5000 for “low-income” families. Note that this won’t help families who have insurance from the employers but have significant gaps in their coverage.
In reforming the private sector, John McCain claims that allowing people to buy insurance across state lines will increase competition and lowers costs, but Slate argues that insurance companies would then move their operations to states that had weak consumer protect laws.
He would also lower costs by emphasizing more preventive care and better treatment for chronic illnesses. To that end, he even suggests linking Medicare and Medicaid payments to doctors to their performance in treating disease. As if doctors weren’t already motivated to treat their patients to the best of their ability?
While Barack Obama would not allow companies to discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions, John McCain’s free market would not force companies to accept everybody. As Elizabeth Edwards once said:
Elizabeth Edwards, the wife of former Democratic presidential contender John Edwards, said she and John McCain have one thing in common: “Neither one of us would be covered by his health policy.”
Put short, McCain’s plan involves tax credits and deregulation. He does not require the medical insurance industry to cover anybody. He will not support health care mandates for children. In fact, he supported President Bush’s veto of the expansion of a health insurance program for poor children. Just for fun, he even throws in a little more tort reform. Most importantly, universal coverage isn’t even a goal for John McCain. To John McCain, health care is still a privilege, rather than a human right.
Senator Obama would go much further, requiring businesses either to provide insurance or contribute to a public fund for the uninsured. He would also create a public nonprofit plan for the uninsured to compete with the private plans. And under President Obama’s plan, covering children would be mandatory.
Many of us—including Paul Krugman—are justifiably angry about Senator Obama’s attacks on Hillary’s health care plan. Although Prof. Krugman may well be right when he argued that Senator Obama undermined the chances for reform when he attacked Senator Clinton’s—and Senator Edwards’s—health care plan, is the most appropriate response for those of us who embraced her health care plan to turn to the man who supported President Bush’s veto of the legislation to expand health coverage to poor, uninsured children?
I think that the whole idea of universal health care is such a core Democratic principle that I am willing to go to the mat for it. I've been there before. I will be there again. I am not giving in; I am not giving up; and I'm not going to start out leaving 15 million Americans out of health care.
Hillary will do whatever it takes. Will you be there with her?
1. No attacks on posters or other commenters. 2. No thread hijacking is allowed. 3. Foul language is permitted, but language that is demeaning of one's race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, and/or gender identity is NOT.
The administrators reserve the right to moderate and/or delete any comments that violate the Terms of Use.
Comments, suggestions, or complaints may be sent to c4oblog@yahoo.com
Posts
