Seven More Reps Sign On to HR 676; House Holds Single Payer Hearing

[sisters6]

Good news--it is not dead.



Seven More Reps Sign On to HR 676; House Holds Single Payer Hearing

Since May 20 seven more US Representatives have signed on to HR 676,
national single payer health care sponsored by Congressman John Conyers
(D-MI), bringing the total, including Conyers, to 83. The full list is
here: http://unionsforsinglepayer.org/ Click on 111th Congress.

Congressman Conyers was able to get the first official single payer
congressional hearing in decades. It took place in a House subcommittee
on June 10, 2009.

The witnesses included Congressman Conyers, Chair of the Judiciary
Committee and chief sponsor of HR 676; Marcia Angell MD, former Editor of
the New England Journal of Medicine; Walter Tsou MD, National Board
Advisor of PNHP; and Geri Jenkins, Co-President of the CNA/NNOC, plus
David Gratzer of The Manhattan Institute who testified against single
payer.

Don't miss the questioning by Representatives Phil Hare and Dennis Kucinich.

CSPAN video with transcript:

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/includes/templates/library/flash_popup.php?pID=286942-1&clipStart=&clipStop=

Conyers at 7:50
Jenkins at 22:37
Tsou at 29:15
Angell at 40:24
Hare at 1:11:16
Kucinich at 1:19:32

Congressman Conyers is requesting that there be single payer hearings in
every House committee with jurisdiction over health care prior to deciding
on health care reform so that the most popular plan can be fully heard and
considered.

You can call or fax Committee Chairmen Rangel and Waxman to urge them to
hold hearings on single payer health care. If your congressperson is on
either committee, you can encourage him or her to speak to the Chairmen in
favor of single payer hearings.

Rep. Charles Rangel, Chair of Ways and Means, Ph: [phone]; Fax:
[phone]
Ways and Means Members here:
http://waysandmeans.house.gov/members.asp?cong=19

Rep. Henry Waxman, Chair of Energy and Commerce [phone]
Energy and Commerce Members here:
http://energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=160&Itemid=61
#30#

Distributed by:
All Unions Committee For Single Payer Health Care--HR 676
c/o Nurses Professional Organization (NPO)
1169 Eastern Parkway, Suite 2218
Louisville, KY 40217
[phone]
Email: [email protected]
http://unionsforsinglepayerHR676.org
06/16/09

[Chisox08]

1. I'm glad my Rep has signed on to HR 676

[sisters6]

2. I have called mine a few times. but reading his website tells me

he is in the bag with pharm companies.

[Cleita]

3. Welcome to DU.

Getting decent health care legislation, like HR676, is going to be a hard fight.

[sisters6]

5. Thanks. Conyers will give it his best.

[4lbs]

4. I'm not worried about the House passing it. However, when it reaches the Senate, unfortunately

I expect the Repukes and the spineless ConservaDems to eviscerate it as much as possible.

Then it will either be passed as a toothless paper tiger of a bill, or outright rejected.

[eridani]

6. Norm Dicks (WA-06) just signed on to HR 676

I just sent him a check for $26.76. I'm not even his constituent. Maybe if some of the newer cosponsors got similar checks for $x6.76, x = what you can afford, we could spread a little enlightenment.

[sisters6]

15. good. and great idea. OK, I will do also.

[wroberts189]

7. knr ..please lets keep it kicked ..send it to "Greatest" nt

[sisters6]

9. Happy to give a kick. Hope all will call.

[wroberts189]

10. great post sisters6 ..kicking for the afternoon crew. nt

[sisters6]

14. and now for the evening crew.

[wroberts189]

8. Oh and welcome to the DU madhouse :) nt

[slipslidingaway]

11. knr - Witness statements and videos...

http://edlabor.house.gov/hearings/2009/06/examining-the-single-payer-hea.shtml

snip>>

http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/testimony/20090610MarciaAngellTestimony.pdf

Written Statement of Marcia Angell, M. D.
Senior Lecturer in Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School
Former Editor-in-Chief, New England Journal of Medicine

"...Our health care system, then, is outrageously expensive, yet inadequate and
inequitable. How can we account for the paradox of spending more and
getting less? The only plausible explanation is that there’s something about
the system itself – about the way we finance and deliver health care – that’s
enormously wasteful.

The underlying problem, I believe, is that we, alone among OECD countries,
rely on a market-based system for health care. In fact, it’s not a system at
all, but a hodge-podge of different commercial arrangements that exist more
or less independently from one another. The other countries all have
national health systems. Some are single-payer arrangements, which means
that all health care funds, whatever their source, are funneled through a
single public agency, which then coordinates the distribution of resources.
Some have multiple payers, but the system is tightly regulated so that
everyone is covered, and prices and benefits are uniform.

Most of our other problems stem from that decision to treat health care like a
market commodity instead of a social service. Thus, we distribute it not
according to medical need, but according to the ability to pay. But there’s a
great mismatch between medical need and the ability to pay. In fact, those
with the greatest need are precisely those least able to pay. So while markets
are good for many things, they’re not a good way to distribute health care.
People who are well insured may get an MRI they don’t need (and overuse
of tests is a major contributor to cost inflation), while people without
insurance may not get an MRI they do need.

Furthermore, successful markets expand; they don’t contract. Businesses
aim to increase revenues and maximize profits. Hospitals in the U. S., for
example, often advertise their services. Like all businesses, they want more,
not fewer customers. So each element in the health market is working to
grow, even while the country as a whole presumably wants the system to
contract..."

[sisters6]

12. If congress would only them an equal chance to be heard, but

they dissed them from the start. That is what angers me.(as did the WH)

[slipslidingaway]

13. Me too, silenced from the start :( n/t

[avaistheone1]

17. True. That angers me as well. If single payer had been given a seat and fair participation

throughout this process, I think we be seeing a better outcome now.

At least we would have more confidence in our elected officials having our back if they had acted more honestly from the outset.

[sisters6]

18. Yes, Obama needed to be more forceful from the start. I have

become a very disappointed this last few months. all what we have now is a bit of tinkering.

[DrToast]

16. Are they still going to get it scored by the CBO?

There was talk of that, but I haven't heard anything since.

[Kalyke]

19. The House seems far more open to this than the Senate.

How can we get the Senate out of the lobbyists chokehold and onto the side of the people?

Calling and writing doesn't seem to work.