|
|||
Obama Should Seize Moment to Push for Medicare for All, Doctors' Group SaysDr. Quentin Young comments on Massachusetts election, next steps for health reform- January 22 - A spokesman for a national physicians' group says it would be a mistake for President Obama to conclude from Tuesday's vote in Massachusetts that he needs to "tack more toward the right," as some pundits have advised, or to aim for a scaled-back set of piecemeal reforms. Instead, the spokesman says, the president and Congress should immediately move to expand the popular Medicare program to cover everyone. "President Obama and Congress should seize this moment to change course and re-inspire the U.S. public with a plan that is simple, clear, workable, fiscally responsible, comprehensive and truly universal -- namely, single-payer Medicare for All," said Dr. Quentin Young, national coordinator of Physicians for a National Health Program. Young dismissed suggestions by some that the House should adopt the Senate bill as it presently reads, send it to the president's desk, and have Congress improve upon it later. "The Senate bill is rotten," he said. "It's a huge financial handout to the for-profit insurers and big drug companies. If passed, it will still leave at least 20 million uninsured and millions more unable to afford the care they need. "Yesterday's Supreme Court decision removing bans on corporate contributions in candidate elections will only make this fatally flawed bill even more difficult to improve upon," he said. "It's too laden with concession after concession to the private health industry to serve as a starting point." "Instead, we need to start anew and build on a system that we know works well, is cost-efficient and that could quickly be extended to cover everybody," Young said. "That's the Medicare program, which was implemented within one year of its enactment in 1965 and now covers about 45 million people, mainly seniors and the totally disabled." "Extending Medicare to cover the entire population would result in $400 billion savings annually by eliminating the administrative waste -- the unnecessary paperwork and bureaucracy -- inflicted on the U.S. economy by the private health insurers," he said. "That would be enough to ensure high-quality coverage for everybody." Young said it would be a mistake to interpret the election of Republican Scott Brown to the late Sen. Edward Kennedy's seat as a rejection by voters of fundamental health reform. Many independents and Democrats voted for Brown or stayed home because of mounting economic insecurity and their belief that the health reform process led by the Democrats had been corrupted by the big insurance and drug companies, he said. Union voters were especially angry with the proposed excise tax on workers' health plans. "It was more of a protest vote," he said. Young pointed to a 2008 ballot initiative in 10 legislative districts in Massachusetts, including one that overlaps with Brown's state senatorial district, that asked voters if they support "legislation creating a cost-effective, single-payer health insurance system that is available to all residents, and oppose laws penalizing those who fail to obtain health insurance," i.e. an individual mandate. "Seventy-three percent of Massachusetts voters in these districts voted for a single-payer program and against the individual mandate, a hallmark of their own state's plan," Young said. "The Massachusetts plan is now in financial trouble. It's fair to assume that those who voted this way in 2008, like many others in exit polls this week, believe the bills in Congress don't go far enough toward real reform." "Nationwide," he said, "polls show about two-thirds of the U.S. population would favor a Medicare-for-All approach, and a solid majority of physicians now support efforts to establish national health insurance." Young also pointed to the robust movement in several states, including California and Vermont, where physicians, among others, are pressing for single payer at the state level. Nearly 1,000 health professional students and their allies rallied on the steps of the State Capitol in Sacramento, Calif., on Jan. 11, in support of S.B. 810, a single-payer bill that was reintroduced Thursday in the Legislature, he said. Similar bills were approved twice by California lawmakers in recent years, only to be vetoed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. In Vermont, some 300 citizens bearing thousands of petition signatures flooded the chambers of the State Capitol in Montpelier on Jan. 12, calling for enactment of a similar proposal there. Many participants said the national bills were completely inadequate to address the state's urgent health care needs, Young said. A bold policy shift to single payer on the national level is more plausible than many people think, given the public's support for such an approach, he said, and given the Medicare program's "44-year track record of proven success." Whatever deficiencies the Medicare program presently has could be easily remedied in a streamlined, better-funded single-payer system, he said. "In fact, single-payer Medicare for All would yield enormous efficiencies and savings through measures like bulk buying and negotiated fees, benefiting everyone and making the program sustainable for future generations. It would also be a much-needed boon to our economy." "The president and Congress, if they truly stand up against the insurance and drug companies and press for single-payer Medicare for All, will find a public and a medical community ready and willing to support them," he said. ### Physicians for a National Health Program Links: |
|||||
|
|||||||||
Contact: Stewart Henderson, 360-339-3069 Democrat Stew Henderson Announces Broad Support from Across the 22nd District 16 locally elected officials endorse fast-starting House candidate OLYMPIA—Stewart Henderson, a Democrat running to replace retiring Representative Brendan Williams in the State House of Representatives, announced today an array of local government and community leader endorsements. Since entering the race in late 2009, Henderson has been building momentum and support for his grass roots campaign, earning support from a broad coalition of leaders from Olympia, Lacey, Tumwater, the Olympia School Board, Democratic Party leaders and County officials. “Brendan Williams' departure leaves huge shoes to fill, and Stewart Henderson is the person who can do it,” said Thurston County Commissioner Karen Valenzuela. “He has what it takes to negotiate solutions to the big issues facing us all in these difficult times.” With confidence in Henderson’s leadership abilities, Olympia City Councilmember Karen Rogers said, “Stew has the vision, sincerity, temperament and strategic intelligence it takes to be a responsive public servant and a successful legislator.”
Henderson, a longtime Democratic Party activist, has also earned the support of local party leaders. “Stewart's strongest skill is resolution of conflict by helping groups find a solution that they had previously been unable to find,” said Debby Pattin, Democratic Party Committeewoman for Thurston County and a local public school teacher. “This ability will be of enormous benefit in the House, where recent budget crises more than ever before pit various stake-holders against one another.” The full list of endorsements announced today include: · Karen Valenzuela, Thurston County Commissioner · Doug Mah, Olympia Mayor · Karen Rogers, Olympia City Council · Joe Hyer, Mayor pro tem, Olympia City Council · Cynthia Pratt, Lacey City Council · Andy Ryder, Lacey City Council · Mary Dean, Lacey City Council · Ron Lawson, Lacey City Council · Joan Cathey, Tumwater City Council · Betsy Murphy, Tumwater City Council · Ed Stanley, Tumwater City Council · Eileen Thomson, Olympia School Board · Mark Campeau, Olympia School Board · Allen Miller, Olympia School Board · Chris Stearns, Public Utility Commissioner · Jay Manning, Chief of Staff to Gov. Chris Gregoire and former Director of Ecology · Karen Messmer, former Olympia City Council Member · John Cusick, immediate past Chair, Thurston County Democratic Party · Debby Pattin, WA State Democratic Party Committeewoman for Thurston County · Roger Erskine, WA State Democratic Party Committeeman for Thurston County A complete list can be found at www.stewfor22.com. As State Representative, Henderson will focus on creating jobs by improving the climate for small business, advocating for fair revenue solutions that fund schools and critical state programs, streamlining government, and preserving the environment. Henderson is an independent business owner who helps business, government and non-profit organizations with conflict resolution and getting better results. He and his wife of almost 22 years, Kathy Cox, live in unincorporated Thurston County. They met when they served together in the Peace Corps in the West African nation of Mauritania from 1981 to 1983. Their two sons went through the Olympia public schools, graduated from Olympia High School and currently attend college. |
|||
|
|||||
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: United for a Fair Economy BOSTON - December 31 - On New Year's Day, the estate tax, which has been part of the US tax system for nearly 100 years, will disappear due to the failure of the Senate to pass an extension in December. Now, Congressional leaders are pledging to act in early 2010 to reinstate the federal estate tax, making it retroactive to January 1, 2010, an action supported by United for a Fair Economy (UFE). "The Senate's failure to extend the estate tax is the epitome of fiscal irresponsibility, coming at a time when our country is struggling to recover from a deep recession," states Brian Miller, UFE's executive director. "Permanent repeal of the estate tax would increase the federal deficit by $1.3 trillion dollars over 10 years. Those taxes would likely be shifted from multi-millionaire inheritors to the middle class, at a time when middle-class families are already losing their jobs and homes. That's outrageous." The estate tax has been cut five times since 2001. As of 2009, it is paid only on the portion of an individual's estate over $3.5 million, or $7 million for a couple. As a result, over 99% of all estates are unaffected by the estate tax. Very few farms or small businesses are impacted at the 2009 level either, collectively making up less than 1% of all estate tax collections. Those estates that are affected only pay taxes on the portion of the estate above the exemption, not the full value of the estate. "The 2009 law is already generous enough. We oppose any effort to further weaken it," states Miller. "Providing for one's children and grandchildren is a good thing. No one is questioning that," adds Miller, "But how much is enough? Since there is zero tax on the first $7 million left by a wealthy couple under 2009 law, an heir can conceivably inherit more, tax free, than the average American earns in four whole lifetimes. Isn't that enough? And unlike the lucky heir, the working American will be paying taxes on what they earn." Because the Senate failed to act, the estate tax will disappear in 2010, then return in 2011 to the pre-Bush levels with an exemption of $2 million for a couple and $1 million for an individual. However, it is unlikely that Congress will allow the estate tax to revert fully. In response, UFE and other estate tax advocates are supporting Rep. Jim McDermott's Sensible Estate Tax Act, HR 2023, as a middle ground between 2009 and pre-2001 law. It includes an exemption of $4 million for a married couple, with a 45% rate on amounts over that, and a 55% rate on estates worth over $10 million. "The estate tax helps pay for essential services ranging from education to transportation that are the cornerstone of our nation's prosperity," states Miller. "Instead of giving tax breaks to the super-rich, many of the same people who wrecked our economy, we need a tax system that works for middle-class families. That's why it is so important that we preserve the estate tax, allowing each generation to get a fair shot at achieving the American Dream though their own merit. We urge Congress to reinstate this critical source of revenue for our nation and its people." |
|||||
Published on Sunday, January 3, 2010 by the Associated Press CHICAGO - Cash-strapped communities have a message for corporations that promised jobs in return for tax breaks: A deal's a deal. "We will roll out the red carpet as much as we can (but) they are going to honor the contract," said Brendon Gallagher, an alderman in DeKalb, Ill., where Target Corp. got abatements from the city, county, school district and other taxing bodies after promising at least 500 jobs at a local distribution center. So when the company came up 66 workers short in 2009, Target got word its next tax bill would be jumping almost $600,000 - more than half of which go to the local school district, where teachers and programs have been cut as coffers dried up. The newfound boldness comes from communities and states that have long bent over backward to lure companies and jobs by offering abatements and other incentives - to the tune of an estimated $60 billion a year in the United States, according to the Washington-based economic development watchdog group Good Jobs First. The willingness to write - and enforce - so-called "clawback" provisions comes even as companies across the country struggle and against a broader backdrop of governments getting tough on business practices. What's more, the recession has communities thinking about how the tax breaks they dole out will play with residents who have grown increasingly angry at the thought of anything that hints of corporate welfare. "The public is a lot more aware of tax abatements and there's a climate of skepticism about what can be perceived as corporate handouts," said Geoff McKimm, a member of the Monroe County Council in Indiana. With that in mind, county officials drew up an agreement with Printpack, a packaging company, that includes a provision requiring the company to refund either $197,000 or that year's abatement, whichever is more, if the number of employees at a new factory falls below 140. Another provision requires Printpack refund the entire abatement if it employs fewer than 75 people - a guarantee meant to prevent companies from leaving a "skeleton crew" at a location to avoid paying up. "With so many businesses going to Mexico, communities are desperately trying to hold onto jobs," said Amy Gerstman, the county's auditor. "This was a carefully put-together abatement." And companies increasingly are being forced to hold up their end of the bargain. In Texas, where companies can get money from the Texas Enterprise Fund if they promise to create a specific number of jobs, the number of clawbacks rose to nine in 2008, compared to a total of seven for the previous three years combined, the governor's office said. In Illinois, the number of companies from which the state sought to "recapture" incentive money has steadily climbed, from 6 in 2005 to a total of 37 by 2008. Meanwhile, more communities are contemplating similar action. In St. Louis County, officials have told Pfizer that if it cuts 600 jobs, as planned, they'll rethink the $7 million in tax breaks they promised to give the company for the next 10 years. And in Detroit, while the state was approving expanded tax credits in exchange for General Motors Co.'s promise not to move its headquarters, the city council was talking about cracking down on tax breaks for GM and other major employers. "We know that there are more clawbacks getting triggered because more deals are falling short," said Greg LeRoy, executive director of Good Jobs First, who has written extensively on clawbacks. It's unclear exactly how much is being recovered because nobody collects comprehensive statistics on clawbacks, LeRoy and others say. States that keep do statistics only track their own deals, not those initiated by local governments. Communities also may revoke the entire abatement or only a portion of it, while others sometimes simply rule out future abatements, LeRoy said. Finally, some communities crack down on companies quietly, out of concern that they could scare off other potential employers, LeRoy said. He said that fear persists even thought there is no evidence that having or enforcing clawbacks poisons the business climate. "We were told that we were going to ruin Topeka's ability to attract businesses; we'd give Topeka a black eye," said James Crowl, assistant county counselor in Shawnee County, where last year officials approved a settlement that calls for Target to pay $200,000 a year for 10 years after failing to create as many jobs as it had agreed to. So what happened? "Last year we opened a Home Depot distribution center right next door," said County Counselor Rich Eckert. In DeKalb, some officials were concerned about sending a bad message to other businesses considering locating there, said Gallagher, the alderman. But he didn't buy it. "We are 65 miles from Chicago (and) if someone wants to locate 120 miles from Chicago, I can't stop them," he said. Besides, he said, $600,000 means less to Target than a struggling community where he said the city alone is facing a $2 million revenue shortfall. Target was disappointed, but understood the decision, spokeswoman Jill Hornbacher said. "We are very committed to DeKalb and that distribution center and proud to be there," she said. And don't expect communities to back down soon, officials said. "There is much more (language) tied to jobs now because of economy," said Lee Garrity, city manager in Winston-Salem, N.C., which along with the surrounding county is sharing more than $26 million that computer giant Dell Inc. paid after announcing it will close its assembly plant next year. Garrity said officials are even thinking about provisions that are even more specific. "We are discussing whether we need to require the jobs of the company go to people who live in the city," he said. |
|||
![[]](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/workharder.jpg "workharder.jpg")
