News Release Archive | healthcare | Accuracy.Org

Judges Not Debating Their Own Health Care

KAREN HIGGINS via Charles Idelson, cidelson at nationalnursesunited.org, or Carl Ginsburg, press at calnurses.org
With nearly half the Supreme Court justices who will pass judgment on the 2010 healthcare law beyond the age where they have to worry about their access to basic care, a leading voice for nurses said today that “all Americans should have the same level of security about their health.”

Higgins is a registered nurse and co-president of National Nurses United. Today she said: “For these judges, that means no concerns about being bankrupted by medical bills, denied needed treatment because some insurance agent deemed it ‘experimental’ or ‘not medically necessary,’ barred from choosing the provider of their choice because they were ‘out of network’ or forced to keep an unwanted job to maintain their present employer-paid coverage.”

“That guarantee could be achieved by extending Medicare, for which four of the nine judges already qualify, to everyone, without raising constitutional questions posed by the individual mandate that forces everyone without coverage to buy private, commercial health insurance” said the 170,000-member National Nurses United in a statement today.

Higgins added: “The Obama administration and Congress could have pre-empted the legal fight over their law by instead just expanding Medicare, a more humane, cost effective system which has no constitutional questions, to everyone under 65.

“Even now, Congress and the President could pre-empt an adverse court ruling by passing Medicare-for-all legislation currently in Congress, S 915 and HR 1200, and end our healthcare nightmare once and for all.”

Beyond “Both Sides” — Doctors Against Mandate and for Universal Coverage

In a recent letter published by the New York Times, the former editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, Dr. Arnold Relman, notes that their coverage of the debate about a health insurance mandate didn’t “mention an important new argument against the Affordable Care Act’s mandated purchase of private insurance, the key issue before the Supreme Court.

“Last month, an amicus brief was filed by 50 doctors and two nonprofit organizations arguing that Congress could avoid a mandate by legislating a national single-payer system that provides nearly universal insurance coverage.

“Congress has already created two limited single-payer systems — Medicare and the veterans’ health system — and no legal barriers prevent doing more. Since a mandate isn’t necessary for Congress to exercise its legitimate role in regulating health insurance, there is no justification under the Constitution’s ‘necessary and proper’ clause for such a legislative requirement.”

The following are signatories to this Supreme Court brief and are available for interviews; those in D.C. will be at the Court on Tuesday. See: “Single Payer Doctors to Rally at Supreme Court,” which links to a PDF of the brief.

MARGARET FLOWERS, M.D., mdpnhp at gmail.com
Flowers an organizer with the National Occupation of Washington, D.C.

RUSSELL MOKHIBER, russellmokhiber at gmail.com
Mokhiber is founder of Single Payer Action and editor of the Corporate Crime Reporter. He said today: “The Obama people say: uphold the law. The right wing says: strike down the law and go back to how things were. We say: strike down the Obama mandate — it’s unconstitutional and pass single payer — everybody in, nobody out.”

CLARK NEWHALL, clark.newhall at health-justice.org
Executive director of Health Justice, Newhall is a doctor and a lawyer. He said today: “The divide is not between liberal and conservative so much as it is between corporatists and everyone else. The current system is in effect a subsidy to the heath insurance industry. We should instead move to get rid of that industry, it is simply not sustainable.”

Contraception Controversy Would Be Irrelevant with National Health Care

AP reports: “In an election year battle mixing birth control, religion and politics, Democrats narrowly blocked an effort by Senate Republicans to overturn President Barack Obama’s order that most employers or their insurers cover the cost of contraceptives.”

CLARK NEWHALL, clark.newhall at health-justice.org
Executive director of Health Justice, Newhall is a doctor and a lawyer. He said today: “What a stupid argument we’re having. If we had national health care, a single-payer program, that would make this irrelevant. Everyone would have health care and it doesn’t matter what your employer thinks. It would be your health care, not the business or your employer or anyone else.”

See MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell commentary: “With single payer, we wouldn’t be in this mess.”

The point was also made in a recent letter in the Chicago Tribune:

“I would like to point out that the recent controversy over employers’ religious views and employees’ health coverage would never have happened if our country had a universal coverage, single-payer health care system.

“That’s because, under single-payer, employers would no longer have to have any involvement in their employees’ health insurance.

“An employer’s religious affiliation or moral beliefs would be a non-issue.

“Under single-payer, everyone would have the same health coverage, regardless of whom they worked for.

“And under single-payer, losing one’s job would no longer mean losing one’s health insurance.

“Something to think about.”

– Dr. Thomas M. Duffy, Northbrook

On Healthcare Insurance Ruling: How to Get to Universal Coverage Without a Mandate

On Monday U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson in Florida ruled the Obama administration’s healthcare insurance overhaul was unconstitutional. The law will stay in effect while the decision is appealed.

CLARK NEWHALL
Executive director of Health Justice, Newhall is a doctor and a lawyer. He said today: “Just like the government cannot force you to buy a car from GM because there is not enough mass transit, so too Congress cannot force you to buy insurance from Wellpoint when there is not enough health care access. Notably, the Florida judge said that Congress can certainly ‘regulate’ insurance, and he also determined that a government benefit program (Medicaid) is constitutional, but he said that the individual mandate is so integral to the PPACA [last year's major healthcare insurance law] that the entire act is void. In other words, the government cannot say — you MUST buy insurance from a private company.

“What options are left to Americans if this ruling stands in the Supreme Court? [Read more...]

As House Votes to Repeal “Obamacare,” Vermont Moving Toward Single Payer

MARGARET FLOWERS
MARK ALMBERG
Flowers is congressional fellow for the 18,000-member Physicians for a National Health Program; Almberg is the organization’s communications director. Flowers said today: “The Republican repeal of the health law in the House yesterday would initiate a race to the bottom. Their plan to open the sale of insurance across state lines would lead to an administrative nightmare for patients and providers and further lower the quality of health insurance plans. We need a real and simpler solution: improved Medicare for all. Fortunately states like Vermont are picking up where the federal government has failed and are much closer to passing a single payer health plan.”

For more information, contact at the Institute for Public Accuracy:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167

http://pnhp.org