[Winona Online Democracy]
I regret adding another topic to our already full plate of topics, especially one day before a holiday but this is too important to ignore. I would like to help put together some kind of community forum or town hall meeting on the DM&E railroad expansion...in addition.... Would anyone else also be interested in putting together some kind of forum or town hall meeting on the subject of health care, including universal health care coverage? Dwayne 453-9012 ================= New York Times November 16, 2001 SMALL VOTE FOR UNIVERSAL CARE IS SEEN AS CARRYING A LOT OF WEIGHT by Pam Belluck http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/16/national/16MAIN.html PORTLAND, Maine, Nov. 14 ó It was the kind of Election Day enterprise that usually slips under the radar, a local nonbinding resolution about health insurance at a time when the nation is consumed by matters of war and terrorism. Most people expected a low-budget campaign and low-static vote with little teeth to it. Instead, a vote this month in Portland on whether Maine should become the first state with universal health care could be the beginning of a new round in the nation's health care debate. The state's primary health insurer spent hundreds of thousands of dollars ó more than some Congressional candidates here spend ó to try to defeat the referendum, even though it was purely advisory. Opponents of the measure broadcast a battery of television commercials contending that government-run health care would mean long waits, rationed medical care, prohibitively high taxes and bureaucratic nightmares. And now that the referendum has passed, albeit by 52 percent to 48 percent, both sides are bracing for more bruising battles, with the issue likely to come before the Maine Legislature next session. "I would expect a full-court press this time around," said Bill Coogan, an associate professor of political science at the University of Southern Maine. "They're not going to fool around with this now." Attempts to bring about universal health coverage are under way in several states, including Maryland and Oregon. Dozens of other states have made more incremental moves toward expanding health coverage, like increasing coverage for children or using money from the settlement with tobacco companies to pay for prescription drugs. But passage of the proposal ó to set up a health care system in which the state government would insure everyone ó indicates a reawakened interest in universal health care and, more important, the amount spent to defeat it shows how seriously the health care industry is taking the new movement. Diane Lardie, national director of the Universal Health Care Action Network, a national group based in Cleveland, said that after the defeat of the Clinton health care plan in 1994, organizations advocating expanded health care coverage "faded into oblivion." "But they're coming back again," Ms. Lardie added. She called the Portland vote "a harbinger of things to come." Even private health insurers are acknowledging public discontent with health care and are beginning to speak of the need for a system that reins in rate increases and covers everyone in some form. "We can't have these kinds of increases year after year after year," said Bill Cohen, a spokesman for Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield, the largest insurer in Maine. "We've got to do something." But that is where private insurers and proponents of a government-insured, or single-payer system, part company. Supporters of Canada's government-administered health service say that a single-payer system would not only cover everyone, it would cost less, be more efficient, and eliminate so much paperwork that thousands of paper pushers would need to be retrained for new jobs. In their vision, the system would be financed by taxes, but would cost less than most people are now paying for health insurance. John Dieffenbacher-Krall, co-director of the Maine People's Alliance, which backs a government- insured plan, said that proponents estimated that for 2001, based in part on studies of state health care costs, a single-payer plan would have cost $5.1 billion, while the current system will cost $5.5 billion. "We ought to guarantee insurance for every patient, good insurance where you can choose your doctor and that's guaranteed," said Dr. Duncan Wright, an emergency room psychiatrist at the Maine Medical Center, who helped lead the campaign for the referendum. Dr. Wright, who is also coordinator of the Southern Maine Labor Party, said he had been motivated by patients like a suicidal woman who had to spend down her life savings to be admitted to a hospital under a health plan for the indigent. "I don't think it's going to solve any of the problems," said Dr. Ron Carroll, an oncologist who appeared in a commercial opposing a government health system and said doctors could find other ways to rein in costs. Dr. Carroll said a single-payer plan "engages in budget controls, which ultimately result in the rationing of health care." To fight the measure, Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield contributed $382,000 to a group called Citizens for Sensible Health Care Choices, which sought to seed doubts with television commercials that reminded some of the "Harry and Louise" advertisements that helped defeat the Clinton health plan. People on both sides say if not for the commercials, the measure would have passed by a wide margin in Portland, a city of 65,000 with a concentration of colleges, artists and young people that helps make it Maine's most liberal community. Mark Cenci, co-chairman of Citizens for Sensible Health Care Choices and chairman of Maine's Libertarian Party, said that what was striking was not how much Anthem spent on the campaign, but how little the single-payer proponents raised, about $25,000. "They had one year," said Mr. Cenci, a geologist involved in wastewater cleanup who does not have health insurance. "If they couldn't raise significant money, that shows they're incompetent." Maine, with about 165,000 uninsured residents, about 13 percent of its population, has made other attempts to expand health care coverage and cut costs, including using the threat of price controls to force prescription drug discounts. Last year, a bill to create a government-insured system passed the House, but narrowly failed in the Senate. Ultimately, Gov. Angus King, an independent, who opposes a single-payer plan, agreed to create a board to study the issue and submit a proposal to the Legislature in March. The Portland vote was close enough to allow both sides to claim success. "It shows an incredible David over Goliath victory for the people," said State Representative Paul Volenik, who sponsored last year's legislation. "I think the industry was trying to show if they could defeat this referendum in Portland, they would not have to worry about the Legislature putting forth a plan." But opponents give a single-payer plan slim prospects. "I think we beat it," Mr. Cenci said. "If they can't win big in Portland, they're not going to carry anything else." --------------- This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy Please visit http://onlinedemocracy.winona.org to subscribe or unsubscribe All messages sent to the list must be signed with your actual name. Posting of commercial soliticitations is not allowed on this list. Report problems or questions to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
