Wednesday, July 16, 2008
The Corporate Welfare State
What is even more ironic though as they can parade their market fundamentalism around, and condemn anything even remotely aimed at promoting social good as "socialism", yet the second big corporations need any help (and often times even when they don't need any help), you can count on the Republicans to come running to their aid. Somehow it is weak, "bleeding heart", and horrible when liberals want to help out people who can't pay for gas, or pay their rent, or their bills or for food or education. God forbid we raise the minimum wage. Yet when Republicans dump billions of dollars in corporate welfare into the private sector, that is OK. Somehow helping people is an attack on the sacred rules of market fundamentalism, yet when the government subsidizes failed corporations (which they do constantly), that is somehow just. The best part is, the CEO's and shareholders of these corporations get to keep their profits and giant paydays, while their loses are "socialized", meaning taxpayers get stuck with the bill.
Now I'm a firm believer in Democratic Socialism, and I think it is a great thing for taxpayers to pool their resources to lift everyone up, to provide great benefits for the society as a whole. In other countries they may pay a bit more in taxes, but they get free universal health care, they get free college education, they get taken care of, and the government makes sure no one gets neglected. THAT is worth it. In that system everyone gives some, and everyone gets back a lot in return. In the conservative "corporate welfare state", everyone gives some, and corporations get to pocket it, whether it be in the form of corporate bailouts for irresponsible lenders, subsidies for corporations that shouldn't be subsidized, or the ever-popular hugely wasteful no-bid contracts to defense contractors like Halliburton that actually make more profit the more taxpayer money they waste.
Isn't it ironic that they have fooled us into believing that the government helping us is "evil socialism", while the government bending over backwards to give our money to the already rich and powerful is macho capitalism at its finest? I think much in this country would change if people had a deeper understanding of the economy, and how screwed up our national priorities really are when we have a disintegrating middle class, and ever-expanding lower class, while the rich get richer and corporations enjoy record profits, all while they ignore (and profit from) huge crises like global warming. It is just amazing that they have done such a great job at convincing so many voters to vote against their own best interest. This is of course where wedge issues like abortion (even though Republican policies actually increase abortions), gay marriage, and immigration. And that is also why John McCain won't focus on the issues, because the issues are against him, and indefensible, so you'll continue to see him attacking Obama's patriotism, and his wife, and his faith, and his race, and anything else that will distract voters from how the Republican Party has been playing them for fools for decades.
Let's hope it doesn't work this time, but it won't be easy, because the corporate-owned media would love nothing better than to see the status quo continue, so they hype up the non-stories, they focus on the wedge issues, they focus on everything but real issues like the fundamental flaws in our economy, or the environment, or any of that.
Anyway, read Robert Borosage's piece on "Wall Street Socialism".
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
"Health Care For America Now" Abandons Real Solutions For Universal Health Care
Is this better than what we have now? Yes, certainly. Most significantly it prohibits insurance companies from denying coverage based on preexisting conditions, which is a large part of how they screw people now (although I'm not at all convinced that the insurance companies won't find new ways of screwing people). It is also a hell of a lot better than McCain's plan, which isn't really a plan at all, it is just a continuation of the status quo, but it is actually worse because he takes the burden for benefits from employers, and dumps it on individuals, leaving them to the mercy of the private insurance companies. Read the AFL-CIO's analysis for more details.
But just because it is better than really bad, doesn't make it good. The root of the multitude of problems in our health care system is the insurance companies. They, like all corporations, have one concern, one legal responsibility, and that is to their shareholders, and profit. They look out for the bottom line, period. If it isn't good for business, if it doesn't give them more profit, they don't do it. And nothing makes more profit than cutting corners and screwing customers. Do you notice something missing? I'll give you a hint: It's HEALTH CARE! Simply put, GREED is at the core of our health care system, and it will continue to make private insurance companies look for new, more inventive ways to screw over customers. The preexisting conditions exception is one of the many ways they screw people over, but even if that is closed, they still have many more ways to screw you, and they will never stop finding new loopholes.
The private insurance industry is a cancer in our health care system. It is malignant. The HCAN plan is to try to stunt the cancer's growth, responding to new growths with targeted chemotherapy and radiation, but never actually trying to attack the main tumor. They leave it there to spread and continue to kill the system. What we need is to cut it out, completely, for the health of everyone.
The funny thing is, a completely public universal system is so much simpler than trying to tape together and regulate a private-public hybrid. Remember all that "mandates vs no mandates" debate during the Democratic primary? All the crap about enforcement and fears of people cheating the system? If the plans were public and truly universal, none of that would have been an issue, because that system would cover EVERYONE, period. Those debates and regulations and clauses to try to eliminate all of these problems, and the anticipation of future problems, all those issues were symptoms of trying to piece together a broken, bleeding system with spare body parts and duct tape. Our health care system is dead, and HCAN's plan is to give it life, by turning it into Frankenstein. What we need is a rebirth, from scratch, WITHOUT the tumor of greed. The government needs to take the lead in making sure everyone has access to health care. The government's job is to look out for its citizens, and it is accountable to those citizens. The government could administer health care just like it administers Social Security and Medicare, with a goal of helping people, not screwing them over for a profit. The role of corporations is to look out for their shareholders, to make them rich. Corporate America is incompatible with public health--the goal of corporations is not the same goal as the health care system, in fact it is directly opposed. Greed is incompatible with public health. We will never have a good system of health care with the insurance companies in the middle, exacting their pound of flesh.
I'm not alone in seeing HCAN's plan as a complete cop-out. Take it from experts, like Rose Ann DeMoro, executive director of the California Nurses Association (CNA):
Why is Health Care for America Now giving up on real reform?Or Dr. David Himmelstein with his response "A Policy Response to Health Care for America Now" (worth the read), as well as Dr. Don McCanne's "What is 'Health Care for America Now' Doing?". They all point out what should be obvious to everyone, HCAN is missing the point, and totally fails to cure (remove) the root cause of the health care crisis.
The big splash of news and internet coverage for the new Health Care for America Now coalition of labor, progressive and liberal groups is a reminder of the critical importance of health care reform. And a reminder that partial solutions, such as those proposed by the coalition, will only perpetuate, not end the health care crisis.
The groups behind the new coalition are working in concert with the Obama campaign and Democratic leaders in Congress to build "consensus" around a plan that would presumably be introduced in the first days of the next administration, and pushed through to a quick vote before opponents can mount a "Harry and Louse"-style counter attack.
But, in search of a supposedly politically viable plan, the advocates of this approach have surrendered in advance on the only overhaul that will actually cure the disease, a single-payer, expanded and improved Medicare for all reform.
Their good intentions will leave the same failed system in place, and will not even blunt the political opposition from those on the right and corporate interests who will continue to challenge anything that looks like even modest reform.
They create a false hope of systemic change that won't be, squandering the opportunity to achieve the fundamental reform so desperately needed with so many lives in the balance.
They've also missed one of the most important lessons of the failure of the Clinton plan of 1993-94 which collapsed in part due to the absence of a broad, grassroots, activist movement needed to counter the insurance industry. Only single payer engenders such a movement, the very reason the single payer bill now in Congress, HR 676, has more co-sponsors than any other reform bill with tens of thousands around the country already working to enact it.
Health Care for America Now has identified the main culprit and obstacle to genuine reform. As their inaugural ad proclaims, "Will health insurance companies ever put your health ahead of their profits? We can't trust insurance companies to fix the healthcare mess."
There's just one problem -- the coalition's proposal does nothing to end the actual practice of insurance companies putting their profits ahead of your health. Nor does it fix the two central components of the health care morass -- insurance company denials of care and the financial squeeze facing American families due to ever skyrocketing healthcare costs which is exacerbated by the escalating credit crisis.
Consider the four healthcare questions posed by families in the first 30-second ad: "Will they pay for his inhaler? Is my surgery covered? Can I choose my child's doctor? Will they cover the chemo?"
All are the direct result of care denials and price gouging by the insurers -- and none would be solved by the HCAN "statement of common purpose."
How does the HCAN coalition propose to crack down on the insurance pirates? With a "watchdog role" on the plans "to assure that risk is fairly spread" and that "insurers do not turn people away, raise rates or drop coverage based on a person's health history or wrongly delay or deny care."
You can watch someone rob your bank, but unless you stop them, the vaults are still going to be stripped bare. If you're looking for the hammer or any enforcement mechanism in the HCAN proposal, don't bother, it's not there.
The insurers don't care if we know they are thieves, they will continue to deny and delay care because it's in their DNA. It's how they are set up to operate, it's how they make money for their shareholders, it's how they generate plush pay packages for their executives, and it's how they compete with the other insurance giants.
Nor does the HCAN proposal contain any effective cost controls on the insurers. Their commitment to basing pricing on "ability to pay" is a recipe for merely getting the healthcare you can afford, not what you need. It also fails to assure real choice of providers beyond the limited network established by all private insurance plans.
The bone the coalition sponsors throw to single payer advocates is the false promise of a public plan side by side with private insurance. The public plan, they contend, will be so much more attractive that the private plans will just wither away. Don't count on it.
The insurance companies will always be able to lower their prices with cut rate plans with lower standards that they can aggressively market through massive advertising, tele-marketing, even door to door salesmen (as some do now) with a marketing campaign that the public plans will not have the funding to be able to match.
The private plans can then continue to cherry pick the younger and healthier patients while the sicker and older patients are dumped in the public plan, wrecking the whole idea of a risk pool and driving up the costs for the public plan to operate. The competition won't starve the private plans and cause them to wither away, they'll starve the public plan.
There's only one way to stop the insurance industry abuses -- it's to actually stop them. The rest of the world has figured this one out -- see the study in Britain earlier this year that found that the U.S. ranks last in preventable deaths among 19 industrialized nations even though we spend twice as much on healthcare as anyone else. Isn't it time we figured it out here as well?
Like I said before, I believe these groups know that single payer universal coverage is the best solution, but they just don't think it is politically possible, so they are starting out by conceding meaningful reform. That isn't how you negotiate. You start with what you really want, and if it is impossible, you make concessions. You don't concede reform before you even try. There is a movement for single payer health care. People want real solutions and they want the government to lead the way. We just have to put pressure on our representatives so they realize truly universal health care is popular, and should be pursued. We are going to be in a perfect position to push meaningful reform next year, with Democrats controlling the White House and having large majorities in both houses of Congress. Who knows how long this position will last, or when we'll be in this position again? We can't squander this historic moment of great opportunity on bandaid solutions and piecemeal change. We must FIGHT for REAL health care reform. I intend to focus on this quite a bit going forward, especially after the election, because the debate can't be allowed to end with pseudo-reform, if it does the Republicans and private insurance companies have already won.
With that I have nothing left to say, except that I am really disappointed that so many progressive organizations have essentially given up on meaningful reform, and abandoned their mission to push the progressive agenda forward. They have left us hanging, and now it is our job to pick up the slack and pressure those who usually do the pressuring. It won't be easy, but it isn't impossible. So please, do everything you can to push single payer universal health care. And check out the Physicians for a National Health Program website to stay informed and get involved.
And even if you are cynical and pessimistic and don't think we can win this fight for truly universal health care, remember the Overton Window, and help us push it in the right direction, because that will ensure we'll get there eventually, even if we lose the battle (which hopefully we won't).
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Republicans Protect Record Oil Profits, Stop Investment In Alternative Energy, While Oil Companies Screw Over Americans
So you know how gas prices are at record numbers while oil companies are getting rich with record profits (Exxon made $1,287 in pure profit every single second in 2007)? The Democrats in Congress were trying to tax these excess profits and invest that money toward wind, solar and other alternative energy development. These windfall profits taxes would discourage oil companies from screwing over motorists with excessive prices at the pump, as would provisions that would have given the federal government more power to address oil market speculation that has been driving up prices, but the Republicans, as usual, have come to the rescue of their corporate big oil friends, to defend their disgustingly enormous profits that they are making at the expense of everyday Americans.
The Republicans, as usual, have threatened to filibuster the legislation because they think oil companies should be able to amass record profits on the backs of Americans, without any consequences. Yes, the poor poor oil companies. Meanwhile they don't give a shit about the financial plight of millions of Americans, the soaring health care costs, the soaring price of education, the soaring price of gas, the soaring price of food, the soaring rate of unemployment and the soaring rate of home foreclosures and bankruptcies. But hey, don't worry, they are looking out for big corporate CEO's and their record profits, as usual.
The most despicable part, however, may be that they would threaten to filibuster investment in renewable and alternative energy right in the middle of an energy crisis and a looming global warming catastrophe, both of which are only going to get worse in coming years. Our dependence on foreign oil (and oil in general) drives up oil prices and hurts Americans already struggling to get by financially. It exacerbates global warming, pollution and environmental degradation even as we rocket past the point of no return on the path to global ecological catastrophe. And it makes us less safe, as it puts us at the mercy of countries like Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia who have the vast majority of the oil. Developing alternative sources of energy is ESSENTIAL to keeping American families afloat, reversing global warming, and protecting ourselves from being controlled by OPEC, yet the Republicans in Congress stonewall these investments in alternative energy because it would compete with their precious oil profits.
It isn't just despicable, it is criminal.
VOTE THESE GREEDY CORPORATE BASTARDS OUT!
Update: As if this wasn't enough, when Democrats tried to eliminate the $17 billion in tax breaks Congress has awarded to oil companies in recent years, the Republicans stood together and killed the measure. No no, don't you DARE take taxpayer money that could be going to fund things like health care for kids or education or fixing crumbling bridges, that belongs to rich oil companies!
Thursday, May 8, 2008
As Starvation Skyrockets Around The Globe, So Do Profits For Agri-Multinationals
If I had to point to one problem in our country as the most menacing, I'd say it is big corporations, which ruin basically everything, through their insatiable greed. Maybe greed is the more menacing problem in our country, in our society. Yes, I change my answer to greed, but greed's main vehicle of destruction is corporate America, and the Republicans (and corporate Democrats) it owns. Read:
Giant Food & Biotech Corporations Make Billions in Profit from Growing Global Food Crisis
by Geoffrey Lean, The Independent
Giant agribusinesses are enjoying soaring earnings and profits out of the world food crisis which is driving millions of people towards starvation, The Independent on Sunday can reveal. And speculation is helping to drive the prices of basic foodstuffs out of the reach of the hungry.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Wal-Mart Takes Everything From A Woman
[Reason #7114 why Wal-Mart is an absolute monstrosity. It also certainly gives a new, yet no better, meaning to the term "shanking". Indeed, Wal-Mart prospers by figuratively shanking everything from its employees and sweatshop labor overseas to local businesses and the environment. Read, and try not to gag:]
Brain-damaged Woman at Center of Wal-Mart Suit
by Randi Kaye, CNN
JACKSON, Missouri (CNN) -- Debbie Shank breaks down in tears every time she's told that her 18-year-old son, Jeremy, was killed in Iraq.
The 52-year-old mother of three attended her son's funeral, but she continues to ask how he's doing. When her family reminds her that he's dead, she weeps as if hearing the news for the first time.
Shank suffered severe brain damage after a traffic accident nearly eight years ago that robbed her of much of her short-term memory and left her in a wheelchair and living in a nursing home.
It was the beginning of a series of battles -- both personal and legal -- that loomed for Shank and her family. One of their biggest was with Wal-Mart's health plan.
Eight years ago, Shank was stocking shelves for the retail giant and signed up for Wal-Mart's health and benefits plan.
Two years after the accident, Shank and her husband, Jim, were awarded about $1 million in a lawsuit against the trucking company involved in the crash. After legal fees were paid, $417,000 was placed in a trust to pay for Debbie Shank's long-term care.
Wal-Mart had paid out about $470,000 for Shank's medical expenses and later sued for the same amount. However, the court ruled it can only recoup what is left in the family's trust.
The Shanks didn't notice in the fine print of Wal-Mart's health plan policy that the company has the right to recoup medical expenses if an employee collects damages in a lawsuit.
The family's attorney, Maurice Graham, said he informed Wal-Mart about the settlement and believed the Shanks would be allowed to keep the money.
"We assumed after three years, they [Wal-Mart] had made a decision to let Debbie Shank use this money for what it was intended to," Graham said.
The Shanks lost their suit to Wal-Mart. Last summer, the couple appealed the ruling -- but also lost it. One week later, their son was killed in Iraq.
"They are quite within their rights. But I just wonder if they need it that bad," Jim Shank said.
In 2007, the retail giant reported net sales in the third quarter of $90 billion.
Legal or not, CNN asked Wal-Mart why the company pursued the money.
Wal-Mart spokesman John Simley, who called Debbie Shank's case "unbelievably sad," replied in a statement: "Wal-Mart's plan is bound by very specific rules. ... We wish it could be more flexible in Mrs. Shank's case since her circumstances are clearly extraordinary, but this is done out of fairness to all associates who contribute to, and benefit from, the plan."
Jim Shank said he believes Wal-Mart should make an exception.
"My idea of a win-win is -- you keep the paperwork that says you won and let us keep the money so I can take care of my wife," he said.
The family's situation is so dire that last year Jim Shank divorced Debbie, so she could receive more money from Medicaid.
Jim Shank, 54, is recovering from prostate cancer, works two jobs and struggles to pay the bills. He's afraid he won't be able to send their youngest son to college and pay for his and Debbie's care.
"Who needs the money more? A disabled lady in a wheelchair with no future, whatsoever, or does Wal-Mart need $90 billion, plus $200,000?" he asked.
The family's attorney agrees.
"The recovery that Debbie Shank made was recovery for future lost earnings, for her pain and suffering," Graham said.
"She'll never be able to work again. Never have a relationship with her husband or children again. The damage she recovered was for much more than just medical expenses."
Graham said he believes Wal-Mart should be entitled to only about $100,000. Right now, about $277,000 remains in the trust -- far short of the $470,000 Wal-Mart wants back.
Refusing to give up the fight, the Shanks appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. But just last week, the high court said it would not hear the case.
Graham said the Shanks have exhausted all their resources and there's nothing more they can do but go on with their lives.
advertisement
Jim Shank said he's disappointed with the Supreme Court's decision not to hear the case -- not for the sake of his family -- but for those who might face similar circumstances.
For now, he said the family will figure out a way to get by and "do the best we can for Debbie."
"Luckily, she's oblivious to everything," he said. "We don't tell her
what's going on because it will just upset her."
Update (3/27): Joseph A. Palermo of Huffington Post makes this relevant to the presidential campaign, for any of you junkies who only care about things politically-related (shame on you ;):
Hillary Clinton was on the Board of Directors of Wal-Mart for 6 years. Wal-Mart paid her $18,000 each year she was on the board and $1,500 for every meeting she attended. She accumulated at least $100,000 in Wal-Mart stock. This might be the reason she refuses to release her tax records even though Barack Obama has done so. Maybe it's time we demand that she give back this blood money? Moreover, when Hillary Clinton was with the Rose Law firm in Little Rock she defended Wal-Mart against workers who tried to organize unions making the firm, in the words of labor leader Jonathan Tasini, "one of the most active anti-union law firms in the country."
Clinton's shameless posturing about the Michigan and Florida Democratic delegations is just more of the same from this Wal-Mart-loving corporate shill. She pretends to be standing for "democratic" principles while she attempts a legal trick to strip the nomination from Obama. I saw Hillary Clinton tonight on Fox News talking up her Michigan-Florida demands with Greta Van Susteran. Howard Dean and the DNC Rules Committee should simply divide the delegates proportionately between the candidates based on the over-all delegate count nationally each candidate has won after all of the primaries are over. Michigan and Florida will have a seat at the table in Denver and Hillary Clinton will not be allowed to screw the base of the Democratic Party, which seems to be her specialty nowadays. Maybe she can talk to her lawyer friends over at Wal-Mart for help in this dispute.
Maybe Hillary Clinton should visit Debbie and Jim Shank in Missouri and tell them how sorry she is for what her lovely Arkansas corporate campaign donor has done to them. Maybe she can bring along a Fox News camera crew.
