PNHP writes President Obama about bringing Medicare For All to the table

[Cleita]

again. Since I got this in an email, I guess it's okay to post it in it's entirety as there is no link to post except those noted in the letters. Also, they want their emails to be forwarded to recipients' mailing lists of friends who might be interested so I think DU comes under that category.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact:
Jan. 28, 2010 Margaret Flowers, M.D.

Steffie Woolhandler, M.D., M.P.H.

David Himmelstein, M.D.

Oliver Fein, M.D.

Mark Almberg, PNHP, [phone], [e-mail]

'There is a better health plan, Mr. President'

Medicare-for-All doctors available for comment on State of the Union speech

Rising to President Obama's challenge to others in his State of the Union address that they come up with a better approach to health care reform than his own, physicians who advocate for a single-payer program stepped forward this morning to again make the case for their alternative, which they say has solid public support.

Among them is Dr. Margaret Flowers, a pediatrician and congressional fellow for Physicians for a National Health Program, an organization of 17,000 physicians who support a single-payer system, who is traveling to the White House today to deliver an open letter to the president calling on him to meet with her and other Medicare-for-All advocates.

Also speaking out today are Drs. Steffie Woolhandler and David Himmelstein, co-founders of PNHP, primary care physicians in Cambridge, Mass., and professors at Harvard Medical School, who provided commentary in a blog in today's New York Times.

In her letter to Obama, Flowers notes how surprised she and others were when single-payer advocates were excluded from the early stages of the discussions on health reform. Flowers was one of several physicians, nurses and reform advocates who were arrested at Senate Finance Committee hearings last spring for standing up and asking in a dignified way why the Medicare-for-All option was "off the table."

Flowers writes: "I am asking you to meet with me because the solution is simple. Remove all of the industries who profit off of the American health care catastrophe from the table. Replace them with those who are knowledgeable in designing health systems and who are without ties to the for-profit medical industries. And then allow them to design an improved Medicare-for-All national health system."

Flowers then itemizes the advantages of adopting such a system, saying that it would cover everyone, save thousands of lives, relieve medical debt, control costs, help the economy, and restore the physician-patient relationship. Obama himself is on record noting only a single-payer plan would provide universal coverage: "The truth is unless you have what's called a single-payer system in which everyone's automatically covered, you're probably not going to reach every single individual."

The full text of Flowers' letter, and the blog commentary by Woolhandler and Himmelstein, appear below.

All three, plus several other physicians, are available for comment on the president's speech last night.

There is still time for real reform, listen to the American people

By Margaret Flowers, M.D.

An Open Letter to President Obama on Health Care Reform

January 28, 2010

President Barack Obama|
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20500

Dear President Obama,

I was overjoyed to hear you say in your State of the Union address last night:

"But if anyone from either party has a better approach that will bring down premiums, bring down the deficit, cover the uninsured, strengthen Medicare for seniors, and stop insurance company abuses, let me know."

My colleagues, fellow health advocates and I have been trying to meet with you for over a year now because we have an approach which will meet all of your goals and more.

I am a pediatrician who, like many of my primary care colleagues, left practice because it is nearly impossible to deliver high quality health care in this environment. I have been volunteering for Physicians for a National Health Program ever since. For over a year now, I have been working with the Leadership Conference for Guaranteed Health Care/ National Single Payer Alliance. This alliance represents over 20 million people nationwide from doctors to nurses to labor, faith and community groups who advocate on behalf of the majority of Americans, including doctors, who favor a national Medicare-for-All health system.

I felt very optimistic when Congress took up health care reform last January because I remember when you spoke to the Illinois AFL-CIO in June, 2003 and said:

"I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care program." "I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14 percent of its Gross National Product on health care cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. And that's what Jim is talking about when he says everybody in, nobody out. A single-payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. And that's what I'd like to see. But as all of you know, we may 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."

And that is why I was so surprised when the voices of those who support a national single-payer plan/Medicare for All were excluded in place of the voices of the very health insurance and pharmaceutical industries which profit off the current health care situation.

There was an opportunity this past year to create universal and financially sustainable health care reform rather than expensive health insurance reform. As you well know, the United States spends the most per capita on health care in the world yet leaves millions of people out and receives poor return on those health care dollars in terms of health outcomes and efficiency. This poor value for our health care dollar is due to the waste of having so many insurance companies. At least a third of our health care dollars go towards activities that have nothing to do with health care such as marketing, administration and high executive salaries and bonuses. This represents over $400 billion per year which could be used to pay for health care for all of those Americans who are suffering and dying from preventable causes.

The good news is that it doesn't have to be this way. You said that you wanted to "keep what works" and that would be Medicare. Medicare is an American legacy of which we can feel proud. It has guaranteed health security to all who have it. Medicare has lifted senior citizens out of poverty. Health disparities, which are rising in this nation, begin to disappear as soon as patients reach 65 years of age. And patients and doctors prefer Medicare to private insurance. Why, our Medicare has even been used as a model by other nations which have developed and implemented universal health systems.

Mr. President, we wanted to meet with you because we have the solution to health care reform. The United States has enough money already and we have the resources, including esteemed experts in public health, health policy and health financing. Our very own Dr. William Hsiao at Harvard has designed health systems in five other countries.

I am asking you to meet with me because the solution is simple. Remove all of the industries who profit off of the American health care catastrophe from the table. Replace them with those who are knowledgeable in designing health systems and who are without ties to the for-profit medical industries. And then allow them to design an improved Medicare-for-All national health system. We can implement it within a year of designing such a system.

What are the benefits of doing this?

* It will save tens of thousands (perhaps hundreds of thousands) of American lives each year, not to mention the prevention of unnecessary suffering.

* It will relieve families of medical debt, which is the number one cause of bankruptcy and foreclosure despite the fact that most of those who experienced bankruptcy had health insurance.

* It will relieve businesses of the growing burden of skyrocketing health insurance premiums so that they can invest in innovation, hiring, increased wages and other benefits and so they can compete in the global market.

* It will control health care costs in a rational way through global budgeting and negotiation for fair prices for pharmaceuticals and services.

* It will allow patients the freedom to choose wherever they want to go for health care and will allow patients and their caregivers to determine which care is best without denials by insurance administrators.

* It will restore the physician-patient relationship and bring satisfaction back to the practice of medicine so that more doctors will stay in or return to practice.

* It will allow our people in our nation to be healthy and productive and able to support themselves and their families.

* It will create a legacy for your administration that may someday elevate you to the same hero status as Tommy Douglas has in Canada.

Mr. President, there are more benefits, but I believe you get the point. I look forward to meeting with you and am so pleased that you are open to our ideas. The Medicare-for-All campaign is growing rapidly and is ready to support you as we move forward on health care reform that will provide America with one of the best health systems in the world. And that is something of which all Americans can be proud.

With great anticipation and deep respect,

Margaret Flowers, M.D.
Congressional Fellow, Physicians for a National Health Program

http://www.opednews.com/articles/There-is-Still-Time-For-Re-by-Margaret-Flowers--100127-703.html >

Going Down the Same Old Tunnel

By Steffie Woolhandler and David Himmelstein
New York Times 'Room for Debate' blog, Jan. 28, 2010

Having surrendered in advance to the private insurers and drug companies who profit from our dysfunctional health financing system, President Obama and the Democrats who lead Congress couldn't rally the American people to support their woeful plan against Republican attacks.

In the end, the Democrats' back room deals produced a scheme reminiscent of the ones crafted by Mitt Romney (in Massachusetts, 2006) and Richard Nixon (Washington, 1972) -- but even less effective than those.

A simple single payer program could save $400 billion annually on insurance-related bureaucracy and profits, and tens of billions more by driving down drug prices. That's more than enough to cover the uninsured and to upgrade coverage for insured Americans, without increasing health spending.

But the Democrats' efforts to appease insurers and pay off the pharmaceutical industry made covering the uninsured unaffordable. Once they'd rejected single payer (and its savings on useless bureaucracy), the Democrats could only offer unpalatable funding options; stick consumers with ever-higher health costs, raise taxes, or drain money from care. In the end, the Democrats chose all three.

Their individual mandate would force millions to pay private insurers' outrageous premiums for coverage so skimpy that a major illness would still lead to bankruptcy. (And if you currently have coverage you don't like, they'd force you to keep it). They added a steep excise tax on workers lucky enough to still have good coverage. And their massive Medicare cuts included a plan to take billions from already-strapped public hospitals (and other safety net providers) and give it to private insurers. In sum, the Democrats asked middle class Americans to pay more, and get little in return.

The president can regain his footing by reconnecting with the hopes of Americans who elected him and rejecting the sordid corporate compromises that signify Washington politics as usual. A single-payer, Medicare-for-All reform would lower costs, cover the uninsured, and upgrade coverage for most insured Americans. Leading a crusade for such a plan, he'd mobilize vast popular support; enough to overwhelm Republican obstructionism. But instead, he seems intent on looking for light at the end of the same old tunnel.

During his campaign, President Obama declaimed that he'd back single payer -- if we were starting from scratch. One thing's clear from the recent Massachusetts election upset: it's time to start from scratch.

Steffie Woolhandler is a professor of medicine and David Himmelstein is an associate professor of medicine, both at Harvard Medical School. They are co-founders of Physicians for a National Health Program.

http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/28/did-obama-move-health-care-forward/#steffie

[leftstreet]

1. K&R

[slipslidingaway]

2. knr - if you do not want answers then do not ask the question. n/t

[BrklynLiberal]

3. Let's see who is REALLY listening...

[sharesunited]

4. Too many words. Say it succinctly.

Lower the age of Medicare eligibility to zero.

Charge age-based premiums which mirror those charged under for-profit group policies.

Underwrite any deficiency between premiums collected and claims paid with taxes and public debt.

[SlingBlade]

5. Reply from Gibbs : F#$$# You !

And don't even THINK of withholding those campaign donations

[bvar22]

6. K&R for The ONLY viable solution

Unfortunately, The Centrist (Corporate) Democrats are committed to a "Uniquely American" Solution:
Give a Trillion Dollars of Public Money to the For Profit Corporations that caused the problem.

Now THAT is a "Uniquely American Solution !"

[subterranean]

7. Dr. Flowers, of course, was arrested for trying to deliver this message in person.

Obama, the Democratic leadership and the mainstream media do not want to hear about single payer. They never seriously considered any idea other than building on the current inefficient, bloated system.

[tbyg52]

8. Bingo. nt

[Cleita]

9. ...

:kick: for the night shift.

[Lugnut]

10. K&R n/t!

[amborin]

11. k&r

[PHIMG]

12. Want real facts about healthcare reform? Read PNHP's Research Page!

http://www.pnhp.org/resources/pnhp-research-the-case-for-a-national-health-program

Facts covered-- (with scholarly research backing it up)

Administrative costs consume 31 percent of US health spending, most of it unnecessary.

Medical bills contribute to half of all personal bankruptcies. Three-fourths of those bankrupted had health insurance at the time they got sick or injured.

Taxes already pay for more than 60 percent of US health spending
Americans pay the highest health care taxes in the world. We pay for national health insurance, but don’t get it.

Despite spending far less per capita for health care, Canadians are healthier and have better measures of access to health care than Americans.

Business pays less than 20 percent of our nation’s health bill. It is a misnomer that our health system is “privately financed” (60 percent is paid by taxes and the remaining 20 percent is out-of-pocket payments).

For-profit, investor-owned hospitals (link 11, 22, 33, & 44), HMOs5 and nursing homes6 have higher costs and score lower on most measures of quality than their non-profit counterparts.
Immigrants1 and emergency department visits2 by the uninsured are not the cause of high and rising health care costs.

The uninsured do not receive all the medical care they need — one-third of uninsured adults have chronic illness and don’t receive needed care1. Those most in need of preventive services are least likely to receive them.

The US could save enough on administrative costs1 (more than $350 billion annually) with a single-payer system2 to cover all of the uninsured.

The Canadian single payer healthcare system produces better health outcomes (Cite 1, Cite 2) with substantially lower administrative costs (Cite 3, Cite 4) than the United States.

Computerized medical records1 and chronic disease management2 do not save money. The only way to slash administrative overhead3 and improve quality (Cite 4, Cite 5) is with a single payer payer system.

Alternative proposals for “universal coverage” do not work. State health reforms over the past two decades have failed to reduce the number of uninsured1