Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Bill Moyers - Rx and the Single Payer

Rx and the Single Payer

 

By Bill Moyers

 

Campaign for America's Future

May 22, 2009

 

http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2009052122/rx-and-single-payer

 

In 2003, a young Illinois state senator named Barack

Obama told a local AFL-CIO meeting, "I am a proponent

of a single-payer universal health care program."

 

Single payer. Universal. That's health coverage, like

Medicare, but for everyone who wants it. Single payer

eliminates insurance companies as pricey middlemen. The

government pays care providers directly. It's a system

that polls consistently have shown the American people

favoring by as much as two-to-one.

 

There was only one thing standing in the way, Obama

said six years ago: "All of you know we might not get

there immediately because first we have to take back

the White House, we have to take back the Senate and we

have to take back the House."

 

Fast forward six years. President Obama has everything

he said was needed - Democrats in control of the

executive branch and both chambers of Congress. So

what's happened to single payer?

 

A woman at his town hall meeting in New Mexico last

week asked him exactly that. "If I were starting a

system from scratch, then I think that the idea of

moving towards a single-payer system could very well

make sense," the President replied. "That's the kind of

system that you have in most industrialized countries

around the world.

 

"The only problem is that we're not starting from

scratch. We have historically a tradition of employer-

based health care. And although there are a lot of

people who are not satisfied with their health care,

the truth is, is that the vast majority of people

currently get health care from their employers and

you've got this system that's already in place. We

don't want a huge disruption as we go into health care

reform where suddenly we're trying to completely

reinvent one-sixth of the economy."

 

So the banks were too big to fail and now, apparently,

health care is too big to fix, at least the way a

majority of people indicate they would like it to be

fixed, with a single payer option. President Obama

favors a public health plan competing with the medical

cartel that he hopes will create a real market that

would bring down costs. But single payer has vanished

from his radar.

 

Nor is single payer getting much coverage in the

mainstream media. Barely a mention was given to the

hundreds of doctors, nurses and other health care

professionals who came to Washington last week to

protest the absence of official debate over single payer.

 

Is it the proverbial tree falling in the forest, making

a noise that journalists can't or won't hear? Could the

indifference of the press be because both the President

of the United States and Congress have been avoiding

single payer like, well, like the plague? As we see so

often, government officials set the agenda by what they

do and don't talk about.

 

Instead, President Obama is looking for consensus,

seeking peace among all the parties involved. Except

for single payer advocates. At that big White House

powwow in Washington last week, the President asked

representatives of the health care business to reason

together with him. "What's brought us all together

today is a recognition that we can't continue down the

same dangerous road we've been traveling for so many

years," he said, " that costs are out of control; and

that reform is not a luxury that can be postponed, but

a necessity that cannot wait."

 

They came, listened, made nice for the photo op. and

while they failed to participate in a hearty chorus of

"Kumbaya," they did promise to cut health care costs

voluntarily over the next ten years. The press ate it

up - and Mr. Obama was a happy man.

 

Meanwhile, some of us looking on - those of us who've

been around a long time - were scratching our heads.

Hadn't we heard this before?

 

Way, way back in the 1970's Americans were riled up

over the rising costs of health care. As a presidential

candidate, Jimmy Carter started talking about the

government clamping down. When he got to the White

House, drug makers, insurance companies, hospitals and

doctors - the very people who only a decade earlier had

done everything they could to strangle Medicare in the

cradle - seemed uncharacteristically humble and

cooperative. "You don't have to make us cut costs,"

they promised. "We'll do it voluntarily."

 

So Uncle Sam backed down, and you guessed it. Pretty

soon medical costs were soaring higher than ever.

 

By the early `90s, the public was once again hurting in

the pocketbook. Feeling our pain, Bill and Hillary

Clinton tried again, coming up with a plan only

slightly more complicated than the schematics for an

F-18 fighter jet.

 

This time the health industry acted more like Tony

Soprano than Mother Teresa. It bludgeoned the Clinton

reforms with one of the most expensive and deceitful

public relations and advertising campaigns ever

conceived - paid for, of course, from the industry's

swollen profits.

 

As the drug and insurance companies, hospitals and

doctors dumped the mangled carcass of reform into the

Potomac, securely encased in concrete, once again they

said don't worry; they would cut costs voluntarily.

 

If you believed that, we've got a toll-free bridge to

the Mayo Clinic we'd like to sell you.

 

So anyone with any memory left could be excused for

raising their eyebrows at the health care industry's

latest promises. As if on cue, hardly had their pledge

of volunteerism rung out across the land than Jay

Gellert, chief executive of Health Net Inc. and chair

of the lobbying group America's Health Insurance Plans,

assured his pals not to worry abut the voluntary

reductions. "We believe that we can do it without

undermining the viability of companies," he said, "and

in effect enhancing the payment to physicians and

hospitals." In other words, their so-called voluntary

"reforms" will in no way interfere with maximizing profits.

 

Also last week, John Lechleiter, the chief executive of

drug giant Eli Lilly, blasted universal health care in

a speech before the U.S. Chamber of Commerce: "I do not

believe that policymakers have yet arrived at a full

and complete diagnosis of what's wrong and what's right

with U.S. health care," he declared. "And I am very

concerned that some of the proposed policies-the

treatments, to continue my metaphor-will have

unintended side-effects that make our situation worse."

 

So why bother with the charm offensive on Pennsylvania

Avenue? Could it be, as some critics suggest, a Trojan

horse, getting the health industry a place at the table

so they can leap up at the right moment and again knife

to death any real reform?

 

Wheelers and dealers from the health sector aren't

waiting for that moment. According to the non-partisan

Center for Responsive Politics, they've spent more than

$134 million on lobbying in the first quarter of 2009

alone. And some already are shelling out big bucks for

a publicity blitz and ads attacking any health care

reform that threatens to reduce the profits from

sickness and disease.

 

The Washington Post's health care reform blog reported

Tuesday that Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Carolina

has hired an outside PR firm to put together a video

campaign assaulting Obama's public plan. And this month

alone, the group Conservatives for Patients' Rights is

spending more than a million dollars for attack ads.

They've hired a public relations firm called CRC -

Creative Response Concepts. You remember them - the

same high-minded folks who brought you the Swift Boat

Veterans for Truth, the gang who savaged John Kerry's

service record in Vietnam.

 

The ads feature the chairman of Conservatives for

Patients' Rights, Rick Scott. Who's he? As a former

deputy inspector general from the Department of Health

and Human Services told The New York Times, "He hopes

people don't Google his name."

 

Scott's not a doctor; he just acts like one on TV. He's

an entrepreneur who took two hospitals in Texas and

built them into the largest health care chain in the

world, Columbia/HCA. In 1997, he was fired by the board

of directors after Columbia/HCA was caught in a scheme

that ripped off the Feds and state governments for

hundreds of millions of dollars in bogus Medicare and

Medicaid payments, the largest such fraud in history.

The company had to cough up $1.7 billion dollars to get

out of the mess.

 

Rick Scott got off, you should excuse the expression,

scot-free. Better than, in fact. According to published

reports, he waltzed away with a $10 million severance

deal and $300 million worth of stock. So much for

voluntarily lowering overhead.

 

With medical costs rising six percent per year, that's

who's offering himself as a spokesman for the health

care industry. Speaking up for single payer is Geri

Jenkins, a president of the California Nurses

Association and National Nurses Organizing Committee -

a registered nurse with literal hands-on experience.

 

"We're there around the clock," she told our colleague

Jessica Wang. "So we feel a real sense of obligation to

advocate for the best interests of our patients and the

public. Now, you can talk about policy but when you're

staring at a human face it's a whole different story."

 

=====

Michael Winship co-wrote this article. Bill Moyers is

managing editor and Michael Winship is senior writer of

the weekly public affairs program Bill Moyers Journal,

which airs Friday night on PBS. Check local airtimes or

comment at The Moyers Blog at www.pbs.org/moyers.

 

Research provided by editorial producer Rebecca Wharton.

No comments: