From Paul Thomas:

I'm sending this to you primarily for its excerpt of a Moyers 
interview with two single-payer- advocating MDs who say we can do 
away with the health care middleman industry entirely.
They use Canada as an example with good counters to CONventional 
wisdom-- but see/
read the Moyers interview below.

<http://discuss.epluribusmedia.net/content/trust-yours-are-250000-other-doctors-lying-congress-ama-opposes-public-health-option>Trust
 
yours but are 250000 other doctors lying to Congress? AMA Opposes 
Public Health Option.


The 
<http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/11/us/politics/11health.html?_r=1>New 
York Times reports that the American Medical Association "will oppose 
creation of a government-sponsored insurance plan" because "a new 
public plan threatens to restrict patient choice by driving out 
private insurers, which currently provide coverage for nearly 70 
percent of Americans."

The opposition, which comes as Mr. Obama prepares to address the 
powerful doctors? group on Monday in Chicago, could be a major hurdle 
for advocates of a public insurance plan. The A.M.A., with about 
250,000 members, is America?s largest physician organization.

While committed to the goal of affordable health insurance for all, 
the association had said in a general statement of principles that 
health services should be ?provided through private markets, as they 
are currently.? It is now reacting, for the first time, to specific 
legislative proposals being drafted by Congress.

[...]

If private insurers are pushed out of the market, the group said, 
?the corresponding surge in public plan participation would likely 
lead to an explosion of costs that would need to be absorbed by 
taxpayers.?

While not the political behemoth it once was, the association 
probably has more influence than any other group in the health care 
industry.

[...]

The Association represents interests of 180 groups of physicians and 
the health care industry represents roughly a sixth of the US economy 
according to President Obama.  Combining that fact with the personal 
care and trust most Americans attribute to their doctors, one would 
normally consider the policy arguments of the AMA with high regard.

<http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2005/01/03/prca0103.htm>Recent 
history supports that assumption, for example, with the 2005 Gallup 
report that showed two-thirds of Americans trusted physicians as 
having "high" or "very high" "honesty and ethical standards."

Perhaps the NYT story presages a continuation of the downward trend 
showing they'd fallen to
fifth place from second, among the twenty-one professions considered in 2003.

Perhaps it's the company kept by AMA members since "the group has 
historically had a strong lobbying operation, supplemented by 
generous campaign donations?"  But something must explain the 
divergence of the policy stance held by the organization as compared 
to that of single-payer advocates interviewed by Bill Moyers last 
week.

The positions of these doctors reside at the opposite end of the 
policy spectrum where they can cite a real-world example where the 
cost-inflating private-sector was completely eliminated to cut the 
per-person bill for medical treatment to one-half of what Americans 
pay.

And the other arguments are in keeping with an unavoidable 
conclusion, that either Doctors Wolfe and Hmmelstein blatantly lied 
through the teeth in grandest fashion to their PBS host, or the 
American Medical Association is advocating policy that designs to 
favor the best interests of someone besides the American public.

I invite you to read 
<http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05222009/transcript2.html>the 
transcript-excerpt below the fold but strongly urge that you 
<http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05222009/watch2.html>watch the 
Moyers interview that I linked 
<http://discuss.epluribusmedia.net/content/sex-single-payers-and-videotape>a 
few days ago.

Then ask yourself, just who can you trust to provide the wisest 
advice to our Congresspeople?

The AMA recorded its own slide down the slope of American trust 
(which, by the way, ranked nurses the highest in 2005!) while 
single-payer advocates have been locked out of all the roundtables, 
so far, because the big-money interests have ensured that their 
profit must be part of Congress's health-care 'reform' legislation. 

Or it won't pass!

[<http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/05222009/transcript2.html>Full 
transcript here]

BILL MOYERS: I've heard you say that several times. I've read you're 
saying it. We can do away with the health industry. I mean, them's 
fightin' words, a very powerful part of the economy, and they're a 
powerful part of the political statute, as David said.

DR. SIDNEY WOLFE: It absolutely is. And in Canada, back in 1970 or 
so, they were spending the same percentage of their gross national 
product as we were on health. They had huge numbers of uninsured 
people. They had the same insurance companies. Blue Cross Blue 
Shield. They decided to just get rid of the health insurance 
industry. That it was the only way to go. They had experimented with 
it in Saskatchewan ten years earlier. It worked so well, they 
couldn't wait to do it nationally. So, where there's a will, there's 
a way. There is no way we are ever going to get to having good health 
insurance for everyone, as long as there's a health insurance 
industry, in the way, obstructing care.

BILL MOYERS: What do you say to the argument, though, of people 
who've gone to Canada, and looked at that system. "Well, there are 
long waiting lines. You can't choose your doctor." In fact, 
conservative critics say that this will lead to what they dread which 
is socialized medicine. Would single-payer in fact mean I could not 
choose my doctor?

DR. DAVID HIMMELSTEIN: Well, in Canada, actually, you can go to any 
doctor, any hospital in the country.

DR. SIDNEY WOLFE: Much more choice than here.

DR. DAVID HIMMELSTEIN: Yeah, Canadians have better choice than we do. 
They spend half as much per person on health care as we do. And if 
you're going to cut our budget by 50 percent, we'd have to have some 
waiting lines. But if we're willing to keep spending at our current 
levels, we could cover everybody with first dollar coverage with 
terrific access to care.

BILL MOYERS: What do you mean first dollar coverage?

DR. DAVID HIMMELSTEIN: No co-payment, no deductible. You go to the 
doctor. The whole bill is paid. Any doctor, any hospital in the 
country. That's the model. And that's not just me who says that. The 
Congressional Budget Office has said that in the past. The Government 
Accountability Office says we're spending enough to do that. And 
we're really talking about social insurance, like Medicare is social 
insurance. But doctors and hospitals remaining privately owned.



In case you are interested, I'm trusting the little guys' side.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to Mark Crispin Miller's 
"News From Underground" newsgroup.

To unsubscribe, send a blank email to 
[email protected] OR go to 
http://groups.google.com/group/newsfromunderground and click on the 
"Unsubscribe or change membership" link in the yellow bar at the top of the 
page, then click the "Unsubscribe" button on the next page. 

For more News From Underground, visit http://markcrispinmiller.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to