If you can bear to read another depressing healthcare diary, you will understand and have $ome human empathy for Hillary Clinton and why $he is being, $hall we $ay, a little cautiou$ about $tepping on too many toe$$$$ when it comes to discu$$ing her health care plan.
$he $ays it'$ about "$cars"--from the la$t time. Okay. Read on.
You kind of get what I'm $saying.
"I still have the scars to show for it," she tells voters now, promising a more consensus-based approach to health care reform if she is elected president.
But that newfound caution has also come with a price. While rivals Barack Obama and John Edwards have both laid out sweeping health care reform plans with estimated costs attached, Clinton has so far proposed only modest changes to the existing system while avoiding the vexing question of how to provide coverage for all.
Now I'm going to describe what happens in countries, where the political class runs amok and ignores the will of the people.
One of my closest friend is Chinese. She grew up in China during the Cultural Revolution. We were talking about the life of her ten year old son in the United States. When she was ten, she was sent to work in a factory after school. She described a life of unimaginable hardship. Obviously I am not comparing how she grew up with our current situation in the United States. Though in 2007, in the richest country on the planet, many American children go to bed hungry every night, just as she and her siblings did in China during the Cultural Revolution.
But she did say something over and over which, in my opinion bears repeating. She said during the Cultural Revolution "we lost two generations". I think she meant that China is still repairing and rebuilding from the destruction caused during that tumultuous period in Chinese history.
It will also take the United States several generations to repair the damage created during the eight year Bush regime. Our broken healthcare system is but one utterly destroyed American institution which will not be easily transformed or repaired. The chances of historic reform is almost nil until the political class places the needs of the American people before those special interests who trade huge amounts of money for corporate-friendly but citizen-toxic public policy.
If the the 2008 election is bought and paid for by the health care industries, notably big pharma and the for-profit insurance industry, meaningful and comprehensive healthcare reform will be a victim.
Until and unless we have publically financed elections, we will not be able to rid ourselves of the parasitic and lethal for-profit healthcare system in the United States.
I've never done this before but the health catastrophe is so urgent that I am reproducing here, in its entirety, a report I just received from California Nurses Association. CNA is doing magnificent work exposing our bought and paid for political process to the American people.
These are the facts. This report explains why the Democratic Presidential candidates are unwilling and unable to advocate fundamental and historic reforms, namely a single-payer healthcare system, similar to what the rest of the civilized world enjoys.
Healthcare Industry Contributions to Presidential
Candidates Top $3.7 Million in 2007, Study Says
At New Hampshire press conference with Michael Moore,
Nurses say Money Influencing Candidates’ Stance
Promoting Insurance-Based Healthcare Plans
Democratic and Republican candidates have accepted more than $3.7 million in campaign contributions this year alone from healthcare industry sources, with more than 45% of it going to just two candidates, Sen. Hillary Clinton and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, according to a new report issued Friday.
Overall, healthcare contributions to the 18 currently announced Republican and Democratic Presidential candidates total an aggregate $12.8 million since 1989 – with 29% of that total donated just in the first quarter of 2007 alone.
Clinton topped the recipient list with $868,722, 23% of all the healthcare money donated to candidates this year. Romney was a close second at $833, 385, 22% of the total dollars. The other frontrunners followed. Sen. Barack Obama, with $574,268, 15%; Sen. John McCain, $423,751, 11%; former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, $408,822, also 11%; and former Sen. John Edwards, $222,950, 6%.
Political donations are just part of the story. Healthcare money also swamps Congress. In federal lobbying, healthcare spending exceeds $2.2 billion the past decade, during which healthcare surpassed all other industry sectors in lobbying expenditures.
"From the campaign trail to Capitol Hill, the healthcare industry has a choke hold on legislation and the debate on healthcare reform," says Michael Lighty, public policy director for the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee whose research arm, the Institute for Health and Socio-Economic Policy, did the study.
CNA/NNOC compiled the research report in concert with the release of Michael Moore’s "SiCKO," a searing indictment of the healthcare industry and its systematic denial of care, including to a great degree, the millions of Americans with insurance.
"The avalanche of healthcare industry cash is corrupting public policy on healthcare," said Lighty. "It leads to legislation that benefits the healthcare lobbyists – such as the recent vote in the Senate killing a bill to enable the federal government to use its bulk power to garner discount prescription drug prices for Medicare recipients. It also encourages Presidential candidates to promote solutions that expand the reach and wealth of the insurance industry."
Lighty noted most of the Presidential candidates favor insurance-based reforms, such as requiring everyone to buy insurance, or taxing employers to buy insurance, or enacting more tax credits for buying insurance. "It is no surprise that the virtually none of the candidates who receive this money advocate the elimination of private health insurance."
In New Hampshire press conference Friday, CNA/NNOC and Moore called on all the candidates to reject healthcare industry contributions, part of a four point pledge that also urges the candidates to support for guaranteed, comprehensive healthcare for life; eliminate the role of private insurers in health coverage; and stronger regulation of the drug industry.
Following the announcement of the pledge, and the first presentation of the CNA/NNOC report, two buses of nurses from Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, Illinois, and California visited the Manchester, NH campaign offices of a number of the candidates to urge them to support the pledge (photos available upon request).
Dating back to 1989 the report, which is based on a comprehensive analysis of publicly available and custom data sets from the Center for Responsive Politics, shows that Romney is the top recipient of pharmaceutical contributions and money from banks and securities and investment firms which are a prime beneficiary of the rapid growth of Health Savings Accounts and other reform plans that rely on financial institutions. The finance industry ranks third in lobbying expenditures the past decade after healthcare and communications/technology.
Sen. Christopher Dodd, whose home state houses corporate offices for many insurance corporations, is the top beneficiary of insurance and HMO donations. Clinton leads among donations from health professionals and lobbyists.
In releasing the report, said Lighty, CNA/NNOC, hopes to help "lift the veil on the corrosive influence of political money. Nurses are the antidote to that greed and callous denial of care. It is their everyday experiences which are depicted on screen in "SiCKO," mirrored in the film’s brutal and heartbreaking stories."
"Nurses around the country are campaigning to change the healthcare system to get the insurance companies out of the way, and will be in front of movie theaters in every corner of our country when ‘SiCKO’ opens nationwide June 29 to encourage the movie audiences to join us," Lighty said.
So now we know the the U.S. Presidential election is wholly owned by a variety of corporate special interests including the for-profit healthcare industry.
I suppose you're asking yourself who's getting the most?
I think I told you in the diary I wrote about SiCKO that there is a lengthy piece in the movie about the political class, it ends by revealing that that Senator Clinton ranked second, right below the late Rick Santorum in health industry campaign contributions.
Before I go any further, I want to say something loud and clear. If Hillary Clinton becomes the nominee of the Democratic Party, I'm going to vote for her like my life depends on it (because it does) on election day 2008. And then we're going to make her deliver for the American people regardless of how much money she takes from the true evil-doers.
Moore and Weinstein Fought Over Depiction of Hillary Clinton in "Sicko"
Ardent Clinton supporter Harvey Weinstein was disturbed by Moore’s portrayal of her as a hypocrite.
Apparently, right-wing politicians and big pharmaceutical companies aren’t the only ones getting riled up over the content of Michael Moore’s Sicko: his longtime producer, Harvey Weinstein (who has stood by Moore since Roger & Me, his first feature), was apparently disturbed by Moore’s less-than-flattering depiction of Hillary Clinton. After detailing Clinton’s failed effort to reform health-care in the mid-90s, Moore goes on to reveal that Clinton eventually became the second-largest recipient of campaign dollars from the health care industry in the Senate. (The largest recipient was the conservative Rick Santorum). Commenting on the situation, Moore said, "Now that Santorum’s out, I assume she’s the largest. I believe her heart was in the right place when she came up with the original plan, even if it was a bit of a mess. But she's changed her position on national health care now. Harvey, of course, is one of her biggest supporters in the presidential race. He thought it would be damaging to include it. I thought it was important to show how the system really works. Harvey didn't like it, but we left it in".
As you might imagine, John Edwards who has the best healthcare plan has received the least amount of money from the health care industries. This fact alone has to make you understand the power these special interests wield.
John Edwards is not the darling of the for-profit insurance industry. And I'll say it again, I think he'd be most apt to go to the mat with these blood sucking scum bastards.
New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton topped the list with more than $800,000 in the first quarter of this year, followed by Illinois Sen. Barack Obama with more than $500,000 and former Sen. John Edwards with more than $200,000.
Last week Michael Moore was in Washington. He met with a great hero of healthcare reform, John Conyers. They held a press conference to revive interest in HR 676. Ask yourselves why only 74 members of congress are co-sponsors of this legislation.
Moore’s film presented a strong platform for the introduction of new healthcare legislation, led by Rep. Conyers. The legislation, called the US National Health Insurance Act, or HR 676, would involve moving to a single-payer system, in which health care would remain private but the delivery would become public with insurance plans only covering non-necessary expenses. Supporters of such a move argue that, by converting health care to a non-profit system, administrative costs could be significantly cut (up to $350 billion) and thousands of lives would be saved.
Seventy-four members of the House already support Rep. Conyers' plan, including Representatives Pete Stark (D-CA), Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), Maxine Waters (D-CA), Black Caucus Chair Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-MI), and Democrat presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich (D-OH). Maryland Representative Elijah Cummings reminded the room that a child died "15 miles from here because he couldn't get $40 of tooth care," and Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-TX) invoked civil rights activist Fannie Lou Hamer, saying she was "sick and tired of being sick and tired."
Many expect the legislation to face resistance from the Bush administration and members of Congress who are influenced by insurance companies' lobbying arms. Moore pointed out that, for every politician on Capitol Hill, there are four lobbyists seeking to oppose health care reform.
Now ask yourself why only 74 members of the House support HR 676?
Crossposted at Daily Kos
__________________________
