“This is truly a global movement,” said Dr. Julio Frenk, a former health minister in Mexico and dean of the Harvard School of Public Health. “As countries advance, they are realizing that creating universal healthcare systems is a necessity for long-term economic development.”

…

But the international drive to provide healthcare for everyone is increasingly leaving America behind.

“We are really an outlier,” said David De Ferranti, a former World Bank vice president who heads the Results for Development Institute, an international nonprofit based in Washington.

This situation is increasingly becoming an international embarrassment for the U.S., as well as an impediment to our nation’s economic progress. Developing countries know they cannot compete globally with an unhealthy workforce. Yet, the U.S. continues to limp along, wasting resources on an inefficient for-profit healthcare system, and seeing its global economic dominance erode. Americans are throwing their hard-earned money down a health insurance rat-hole, leaving them unable to put that money toward paying off mortgages, financing education, or buying cars or other consumer products.

America’s inability to expand affordable coverage to all really comes down to a toxic combination of political dysfunction, corporate greed and a troubling lack of social solidarity, which fuels appeals to selfishness and bigoted attitudes toward the poor and vulnerable. We have one major political party refusing to extend health care as a right to all Americans, while the other major party will not fight for, let alone consider, the best option to our healthcare crisis – single payer. And we have a Supreme Court that next month could undo programs that provide health care to the poorest Americans. While we’re fighting amongst ourselves over an issue that should bring all Americans together, the rest of the world is passing us by.

Sylvia@CaliforniaOneCare.org

In what strikes me as the greatest combination since chocolate met peanut butter, it makes nothing but dollars and sense for clever state governments to shift to a single-payer state healthcare system as the key driver for attracting business to their struggling domains.

Ungar goes on to explain how single payer would benefit businesses, especially small businesses, by reducing labor costs and making them more competitive with foreign companies. He implores conservative state legislators to drop their ideological (and I would add, irrational) fear of creeping Communism, and be open to an idea that would spark economic prosperity. These legislators should listen.

But in America, ideology often trumps common sense – especially when that ideology provides some people a lot of money and power. Since the business community is so powerful here in America, it’s frustrating that more small businesses and corporations don’t join the Medicare-for-all movement. Businesses would rather not shell out the increasingly high cost of health care benefits for their employees. But you don’t see many businesses begging the government to take over the responsibility. You don’t see many of them using their powerful lobbyists to persuade conservative lawmakers to vote in favor of a public healthcare system. Instead, many businesses prefer to shove more and more of the costs onto their employees. Or they drop coverage altogether and create more uninsured people, which ends up shoving the costs onto taxpayers.

In America, anything that smacks of the dreaded “S-word” is to be automatically dismissed. In America, government is bad; privatization and profit are good. People are all forced to play the free-market game, even when it doesn’t make sense. If businesses can’t or won’t provide health coverage, then Americans should purchase private insurance in the open market (the more deregulated, the better), or they can just go without. A public healthcare system that will actually cover everyone and save money continues to be a non-starter. I hope more positive articles about single payer in the business press can change these outdated attitudes.

Sylvia@californiaonecare.org

insightoutnews:

Univision 34:

Sylvia@californiaonecare.org

Paul Mulshine, The Star Ledger, March 25, 2012 – Obamacare health-insurance exchanges are set up to fail

Julian Pecquet, The Hill, March 26, 2012 – Kucinich: Single-payer healthcare on its way regardless of how Supreme Court rules

Peter Morici, SunSentinel, March 26, 2012 – Overturning health care law could lead to a single-payer system

Robert Reich, The Huffington Post, March 26, 2012 – Health Care Jujitsu

Reid Cherlin, GQ, March 27, 2012 – Take It From Me: Defending Obamacare is Super-Hard

George Zornick, The Nation, March 27, 2012 – If the Mandate Fails, Single Payer Awaits

Ezra Klein, Bloomberg, March 28, 2012 – Individual Mandate Is Ryan Tax Credit by Other Name

Meghna Chakrabarti, WBUR, March 28, 2012 – Lawmakers Propose Single-Payer System For Mass.

E.J. Dionne Jr., The Washington Post, March 28, 2012 – Judicial activists in the Supreme Court

Emil Guillermo, San Francisco Chronicle, March 28, 2012 – My Mom, the Supreme Court, and the Affordable Care Act

Michael D. Shear, The New York Times, March 28, 2012 – If Health Law Is Overturned, What Will Liberals Do?

Josh Barro, Forbes, March 28, 2012 – How Obamacare’s Rejection Would Lead to Single Payer

Timothy Noah, The New Republic, March 28, 2012 – Single-Payer Briar Patch

Cathy Young, Newsday, March 29, 2012 – What’s really wrong with Obamacare

Eugene Robinson, The Washington Post, March 29, 2012 – A stronger prescription for what ails health care

Renne Landers, Health Affairs Blog, March 29, 2012 – On The Individual Mandate: Towards A Single-Payer System Or Public Option?

Ezra Klein, The Washington Post, March 29, 2012 – If Obamacare is overturned, will that lead to single payer? And would that be a good thing?

Scripps Howard News Service, March 29, 2012 – RedBlueAmerica: Will ‘Obamacare’ survive?

Mark Mardell, BBC News, March 29, 2012 – What if Supreme Court strikes down Obama healthcare act?

Maggie Fox, National Journal, March 29, 2012 – After the Ruling

Emily P. Walker, MedPage Today, March 29, 2012 – ACA Alternatives Waiting in the Wings

George Lauer, California Healthline, March 29, 2012 – Experts: Medicaid Expansion Will Stand; Mandate’s Fate Unclear

Noah Rothman, Mediaite, March 29, 2012 – Chris Matthews, Ezra Klein Identify Strategy To Impose ‘De Facto Single Payer System’

Beth Hawkins, MinnPost, March 29, 2012 – Growth & Justice lays out its case for Minnesota single-payer health care

David Frum, The Daily Beast, March 29, 2012 – The Wall Street Journal: Unwitting Advocates of Single-Payer

Karen Dolan, The Huffington Post, March 29, 2012 – If Health Care Reform Falls, Look in the Mirror

Steve Erickson, The American Prospect, March 30, 2012 – Single-Payer or Bust

And…

Uwe E. Reinhardt, The New York Times, Economix, March 30, 2012 – The Supreme Court and the National Conversation on Health Care Reform

Reader Comment:

By Don McCanne
San Juan Capistrano, CA

The intense attention being given to the constitutionality of the individual mandate and the severability of guaranteed issue and community rating and to the constitutionality of the Medicaid expansion superficially seems to have detracted from the fundamental issue of whether or not the Affordable Care Act itself should serve as a durable model for health care reform.

With the best possible outcome of the Supreme Court deliberations, we’ll still be faced with uninsurance (at least 26 million uninsured), underinsurance (low actuarial value plans with spartan essential benefits) and unaffordability (lack of effective systemic cost containment).

Right now we are seeing a surge in commentaries declaring that we will end up with single payer (Medicare for all) if the mandate and guaranteed issue and community rating are struck down by the Supreme Court, simply because that’s the only rational financing option left for us.

We will, in fact, end up with single payer, but not because of the pending Supreme Court decision. We will adopt a single payer system simply because we will not be able to continue to tolerate uninsurance, underinsurance and unaffordability.

Additional articles…

Scott Keyes, ThinkProgress, March 30, 2012 – GOP Attorney General Suing Over Obamacare Supports Single-Payer: ‘I Trust The Government More’

Sahil Kapur, TalkingPointsMemo, April 2, 2012 – Why Overturning ‘Obamacare’ Could Lead To Single-Payer

Miles Mogulescu, The Huffington Post, April 3, 2012 – Conservatives and Liberals Agree: Medicare for All Would Be Constitutional

Robert I. Field, The Philadelphia Inquirer, April 5, 2012 – Is public option the last one?

Sylvia@californiaonecare.org

This Sunday Afternoon in Santa Monica:

THE STATE OF HEALTHCARE

2012 AND BEYOND

With

California’s Insurance Commissioner DAVE JONES
California OneCare’s ANDREW MCGUIRE
Consumer Watchdog’s CARMEN BALBER

SUNDAY, MARCH 25, 2 – 4:30pm

William Turner Gallery, Bergamot Station

2525 Michigan Ave., Santa Monica

FREE ADMISSION, FREE PARKING & REFRESHMENTS

Dear OneCare Supporters,

California OneCare supporters are cordially invited to this special PPDC* event, an informative discussion on the state of healthcare reform today, including the latest on the Affordable Care Act of 2010, California’s Single Payer movement, and information on a critical ballot initiative for controlling health insurance rate increases.

Our own Andrew McGuire will discuss next steps for single payer legislation in Sacramento and cover key strategies developed by California’s coaltion for single payer, Campaign for A Healthy California. There will be a Q & A session following the three presentations.

We thank Susan Haskell, and the Pacific Palisades Democratic Club for their unwavering support of California’s health care reform movement.

Sincerely,

George Savage, Secretary, Board of Directors, California OneCare

However, some single payer advocates, are siding with the ACA’s Republican opponents, arguing that the public shouldn’t be forced to buy private health insurance. Unlike GOP critics who want the ACA replaced with either vouchers or health savings accounts, single payer advocates instead want Medicare immediately expanded to all Americans. Fifty doctors and two non-profit groups – Single Payer Action and It’s Our Economy – have filed a friend-of-the-court brief in favor of striking down the individual mandate.

“It is not necessary to force Americans to buy private health insurance to achieve universal coverage,” said Russell Mokhiber of Single Payer Action. “There is a proven alternative that Congress didn’t seriously consider, and that alternative is a single payer national health insurance system.”

The national arm of the Green Party has also called for the justices to strike down the individual mandate.

“America needs real universal health care, not a direct public subsidy in the form of a health insurance mandate to sustain the private insurance industry,” said Barry Hermanson, Green candidate for Congress in California’s 12th District (San Francisco) (http://www.barryhermanson.org). “President Obama and Democrats in Congress could have introduced a Medicare For All bill, which would cover every American and drastically reduce medical costs by removing insurance companies from control over our health care. Instead they acted in the interests of insurance and other corporate lobbies. Even with the mandate, the ACA leaves 23 million Americans without coverage and many millions more with inadequate health care.”

If the Supreme Court overturns the individual mandate, thus crippling a key provision of the ACA, or strikes down the law entirely, could we see a renewed demand from the public to expand Medicare? Would the United States be forced to adopt single payer sooner rather than later? Single payer advocates who oppose the ACA certainly hope so. It’s possible that the public will give national health insurance another look, especially since Republican alternatives like vouchers and health savings accounts don’t lead to universal coverage and don’t control costs. The cost of health care will continue to spiral out of control. Thousands of people will continue to die prematurely. Thousands more will continue to go bankrupt. This much is clear: expanding Medicare to all doesn’t involve a mandate and threat of a fine. Membership is automatic. Should the ACA be repealed, the case for national health insurance will be stronger than ever and lawmakers will have to listen.

Sylvia@californiaonecare.org

Angry activists pointed to the fact that five of the six errant Democrats had received money from the insurance industry and Big Pharma, ranging from $100,000 to over $250,000. Three of the six senators had been endorsed by the California Labor Federation which, along with unions such as the Service Employees and AFSCME, was on record supporting the single-payer bill. The California Democratic Party was also on record supporting it.

Similar bills passed the legislature fairly easily in 2006 and 2008, only to be vetoed by then-Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. At a time when premiums were rising and there were few other proposals out there, it was an easy vote for Democrats certain of the governor’s veto.

But when Congress passed federal health reform in 2010, defending that bill, as well as President Obama, became paramount for many Democrats. It became more difficult for legislators to vote for a single-payer bill that might be interpreted as deserting the president, and the Democratic leadership refused to put the bill up for a final vote in the Assembly.

Read more here.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

O’Donnell is absolutely correct. Neither the health care of women, nor of anyone, should be up for debate. What Americans are witnessing is yet another limitation of our inefficient and unfair employer-based healthcare system. The entire idea of employer-based health coverage is unraveling before us. All workers should ask themselves: Why should my boss decide what kind of health care I receive? Why should anyone’s health care be subordinate to another’s religious or political ideology? Health care decisions should be made between oneself and one’s health provider – not between one’s company and the clergy.

There is a way to ensure that religious institutions can continue to operate based on their beliefs, and to protect women’s right to comprehensive health coverage. We must decouple health coverage from the workplace, and establish a publicly-financed national health care system in the United States. This way, faith-based employers can get out of the business of providing health coverage, and have their religious beliefs respected, while women can obtain the health care they need.

Sylvia@californiaonecare.org

The California Senate was only two votes short of passing SB 810 last week. But six Democrats refused to support the bill when it was put to a vote in the California Senate. You may have been one of the thousands of Californians who called these senators urging them to change their minds and vote for the people of California. You showed them what real democracy looks like. They didn’t listen.

It turns out their allegiance was not to us, their constituents.
It was to those who are profiting from our current broken health care system.

Follow the Money

*Insurance Industry may include auto, life and other insurance

Together, you and I and others like us can turn this around.

Go to the ACT! page on the California OneCare website to see how you can get involved in building a movement for single payer that cannot be ignored. There you will find activities, materials and projects to help educate people in your community about single payer, raise money for the campaign, plan actions with friends, and get endorsements from your community leaders.

Let’s reach every Californian with the message that a single payer health care system will give all of us access to the health care we need at a cost we can all afford.

Become a monthly donor and help us to help you spread the word!

Over the next months we will continue to improve our website. We need your help to become a fully interactive site that will allow supporters like you to communicate and plan activities with others in your community. Your monthly contribution in whatever amount you choose will help make this happen.

Thank you for your continuing support for single payer and our work.

Sincerely,

Jeanne Ertle
Vice Chair, California OneCare

A Painful Betrayal

Editorial

The New York Times, February 2, 2012

With its roster of corporate sponsors and the pink ribbons that lend a halo to almost any kind of product you can think of, the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation has a longstanding reputation as a staunch protector of women’s health. That reputation suffered a grievous, perhaps mortal, wound this week from the news that Komen, the world’s largest breast cancer organization, decided to betray that mission. It threw itself into the middle of one of America’s nastiest political battles, on the side of hard-right forces working to demonize Planned Parenthood and undermine women’s health and freedom.

The Associated Press reported on Tuesday that the foundation is cutting off its financing of breast cancer screening and education programs run by Planned Parenthood affiliates. That means nearly $700,000 less for Planned Parenthood, which performed 750,000 such screenings last year, many thousands of them with money from the Komen foundation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/03/opinion/a-painful-betrayal.html

And…

Consolidated Statements of Functional Expenses

The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation, Inc.

Year Ended March 31, 2011

Public support and revenue – $471,750,158

Program services

Research – $75,301,537
Public health education – $181,092,283
Health Screening Services – $54,089,036
Treatment services – $23,251,563
Total program services – $333,734,419

http://ww5.komen.org/uploadedFiles/Content/AboutUs/Financial/2011%20Komen%20Financial%20Statements%20FINAL(3).pdf

Comment:

By Don McCanne, MD

Nothing further needs to be said about how unwise it was for the Susan G. Komen Foundation to cut off funds for breast cancer services at Planned Parenthood facilities. Having made an error so grievous that some suggest could result in the demise of this public service organization dedicated to fighting breast cancer, we should ask if we can afford to lose their contributions to this effort.

We need to take a look at their program services.

The $75 million that they spend on research could easily be incorporated into the budget of the National Institutes of Health, the world’s largest medical research institute.

The $181 million spent on public education has reached all of us through their pink ribbon campaign. Although it certainly is important for the public to know about screening mammography, isn’t it likely that this will still be common knowledge, even without the pink ribbons?

The $54 million for screening and the $23 million for treatment actually are already being paid for by taxpayers. If you consider that the marginal tax rate for Komen donors likely averages about 30 percent, then tax subsidies for the $471 million in public support amount to about $141 million, far more than the $77 million being spent on screening and treatment. In fact, the balance of our tax subsidies would pay for most of the research that they fund.

A more fundamental question is why aren’t all women guaranteed appropriate screening and necessary treatment for breast cancer? They would be if we had a single payer national health program – an improved Medicare for all. If so, the loss of the Komen Foundation would not be all that tragic, though it is still painful to say that.

Re-posted with permission from pnhp.org.