Does passage of a bill that funnels millions of additional Americans into the private insurance system, and the decision of House leaders to shut down debate on one single payer amendment and scuttle another, mean the end of the years of efforts by single payer activists to win the most comprehensive reform of all?
Does it mean the end of SB 810, even once Governor Schwarzenegger has wandered off the stage?
For the nation's nurses and the many grassroots activists, the answer is clearly no. And we've got work to do.
(They certainly are circling. I'm quite confident that John Garamendi, if elected before the health care vote, will stand up for Americans, not the insurance companies. - promoted by Brian Leubitz)
I was asked to come on to talk about my past experience with the health insurance sharks who are long on making a profit and short on consumer protection. I said what needs to be said about health care reform: it is irresponsible to force people to pay for insurance if we cannot control the cost of their premiums. As I explained to the Los Angeles Times in a story printed today, this is akin to forcing millions of Americans into an insurance market with sharks circling. They have sharp teeth, and they smell blood. It brings a new perspective on who the "consumers" are in health insurance.
Without effective protections - most importantly a robust public option allowing competition - we will continue to allow administrative and advertising overhead to skyrocket. Otherwise, the insurance companies will be able to charge a captive audience whatever they want for insurance.
Some in Washington are seriously considering penalizing Americans for being unable to afford care in a marketplace that doesn't control costs. If voters in the 10th Congressional District choose me to be their representative in Congress, let me be clear. I will not vote for any bill that includes the individual mandate unless I am confident that bill offers generous subsidies for Americans struggling to make ends meet and unless that bill includes the public option to provide real competition in the health care marketplace. I regulated the insurance companies for eight years as California's State insurance Commissioner, and I know those companies well enough to know that we can trust them to put profits before people. They aren't friends to consumers.
What a night! As you may have seen, last night I was the highest vote-getter in the 10th Congressional District special primary election and will now face Republican David Harmer in the November 3rd general election.
I want to thank our incredible team of hard working volunteers. They spent countless hours knocking on doors, making phone calls, and making their presence known at community events throughout the district. Our success would not have been possible without them, and they have my deepest gratitude. Because of their efforts, we won all four counties in the district.
I also want to take a moment to acknowledge my competitors in this election:
To David Harmer: Congratulations on your victory among Republicans. I look forward to two months of dialogue focused on the issues and solutions that matter to the people of the 10th Congressional District. I intend to make it clear that a radical right wing agenda that seeks to stop health care reform, starve the education of our children, fails to finance the transportation and infrastructure systems we need, and advocates more tax breaks for the most wealthy is not in the interests of the people of the 10th Congressional District, California, or America.
To Senator Mark DeSaulnier: Your health care town halls helped establish an important dialogue in the campaign about the need for comprehensive health care reform. You are an institution in Contra Costa County, and you have many admirers. You deserve special acknowledgement for your work seeking a constitutional convention. The two-thirds majority requirement has worsened California's problems and I look forward to working with you to bring a working democracy and majority rule back to California.
Among Democrats, my lead is even starker: 37 percent favor me, 23 percent favor DeSaulnier, 18 percent favor Buchanan, 13 percent favor Woods, and only 2 percent are undecided. Most importantly, our great team of volunteers is effectively converting the support identified in the Survey USA and other polls into actual votes cast. Among those who have already voted, our considerable lead holds: 27 percent voted for me, 18 percent for DeSaulnier, 13 percent for Buchanan, and 10 percent for Woods.
Our lead holds among all demographic groups, including Obama voters, men, women, all age groups, all races, all levels of educational achievement, and all income levels. Our support is broad based and diverse. As the only candidate who has represented all corners of the 10th Congressional District, the voters know where I stand. As CBS 5 explained, "DeSaulnier and Buchanan have failed to make inroads since CBS 5's last poll 16 days ago."
Clearly, with Election Day fast approaching this Tuesday, we like where we stand.
The poll explains the what, but it fails to explain the why. I'm proud of the campaign we've run. We're convinced the polls are a reflection of voter support for a positive issues-based campaign that has emphasized solid Democratic principles and experience that can deliver results.
Last night, our country lost one of the most important public servants in U.S. history, Senator Ted Kennedy. My thoughts and prayers go out to his wife Vickie, his children, First Lady Maria Shriver, the Governor and the entire Kennedy family. The nation and the world have lost a leader with unparalleled passion for social justice and equality, and his legacy will live on in the many lives and hearts he touched. They will carry the flame of justice and service forward.
Senator Kennedy fought for health care access for every American. In the 1990s, he was one of the lead architects of S-CHIP, which has provided millions of low-income children with the health care they deserve, and he tirelessly promoted universal coverage throughout his career. As Kennedy said during his riveting address at the Democratic National Convention in Denver last year:
"This is the cause of my life - new hope, that we will break the old gridlock and guarantee that every American - north, south, east, west, young, old - will have decent quality health care as a fundamental right and not as a privilege."
Thousands of people are lined up in front of a sports arena waiting to receive the health care they desperately need from a nonprofit that specializes in treating patients from the developing world. Some of their grateful patients stand outside hours past sunset waiting to be treated. Basic dental work for working mothers, glasses for young children, infections left to linger, procedures delayed because the cost of treatment is too great.
No, I'm not recalling an incident from the years I volunteered for the Peace Corps in rural Ethiopia treating small pox. I'm talking about the Remote Area Medical Volunteer Corp's weeklong clinic in Inglewood, a community near Los Angeles. For the first time in their 25 year history, they are offering their worthy service in a major metropolitan U.S. city. Where did we go wrong?
Yesterday I was excited to announce that the SEIU California State Council has endorsed me in my race to represent California's 10th Congressional District, a Northern California district encompassing parts of Contra Costa, Solano, Alameda, and Sacramento counties. With 700,000 members, SEIU is the largest labor union in California, and their ranks include a broad cross-section of working Californians, including social workers, nurses, classroom aides, security officers, college professors, homecare workers, janitors, and more.
Why I'm motivated to lead on single-payer health care, the Employee Free Choice Act, and green-collar jobs over the flip...
Truly, one of the strongest aspects of Healthy San Francisco (HSF) is its simplicity. The program allows participants to select their primary care provider from among dozens of local hospitals and clinics, both public and private. Our local system does not require lengthy HMO paperwork and there is no denial of treatment based on pre-existing medical conditions.
A recent study showed that Healthy San Francisco is dramatically less expensive than traditional insurance. And our experience in San Francisco is proving what most American's already know - it is much less expensive to keep people well than it is to treat their sickness, particularly when so much treatment for uninsured Americans is provided in costly emergency rooms.
There are currently more than 40,000 participants in HSF. We are enrolling approximately 600 new participants every week. We have already enrolled more than half of the previously uninsured San Franciscans and the vast majority will have access to health care by the end of next year.
I believe that administration and congressional leaders understand that we cannot wait for health care reform. Our health care crisis affects every aspect of our society - from making sure every child receives the health care they need to succeed in school, to decreasing the financial burden on business, both large and small, so our economy can get back on track.
I know there is pressure in Washington to wait until the economy improves before we act on health care reform. I faced many of the same pressures when I was working with allies in San Francisco to forge our universal health care delivery system.
But "waiting" in politics usually means never - and we simply cannot afford to wait any longer. The lessons we are learning in San Francisco shows that investing in health and wellness is its own kind of economic stimulus.
The time is now to tackle this problem and I applaud President Obama for promising to sign a national health care reform bill by October. We cannot wait for change - the President needs your help. Sign the petition to support President Obama's call for health care reform.
For my part, I was recently made Chair of the U.S. Conference of Mayors Task Force on Health Care Reform. Cities often have the most pressing health care needs and have had to adapt and innovate in lieu of national health care reform. I am looking forward to working with my fellow Mayor's to hear what they have learned in their cities and share what we've learned in my hometown through Healthy San Francisco.
In the end, the task force will identify urban health care priorities and advise the work of Congress and the Administration to help solve this crucial challenge we all share. As always, please feel free to give me your input and feedback in the comments section below.
After years of shredding our public health infrastructure and ill advised minimal preparations for the next great global pandemic, the spreading swine flu threat is at last making clear the very real calamity that could be just around the corner. If not today, surely from the next epidemic.
The Obama administration's call on Congress Tuesday to allocate $1.5 billion for combating the virus is a start, but only a start. The RNs of the National Nurses Organizing Committee and California Nurses Association (NNOC/CNA) believe that far more is needed in federal action, in regulatory crackdown on insurance practices that potentially inhibit those who are infected from seeking help, and in global coordination.
From SARS to avian flu to the swine influenza, the only question has not been if, but when.
For the past few months I have been holding town hall forums across California and no matter where I go, the issue of health care is front and center. These concerns are getting more pronounced and more passionate as the weeks wear on and unemployment continues to rise. People are losing their employer-based health care and COBRA is a temporary and expensive stopgap measure that is stressing already maxed-out family budgets.
The need for bold programs addressing the health care crisis was brought into focus by a new UC Berkeley report showing that more than 500,000 Californians have lost their health care since the start of the recession.
In the past five years, we have worked hard to provide universal health care in San Francisco through our Healthy San Francisco program. We have now enrolled over 38,000 of our city's estimated 60,000 uninsured. It's a great start but there is still much work to do here in San Francisco and across California as the new UC Berkeley report clearly lays out.
On my Green 960 radio show this week I talked with Lloyd Dean, the head of Catholic Healthcare West, Mitch Katz, Director of San Francisco Department of Public Health and Tangerine Brigham, Director of Healthy San Francisco about how to bring the "Healthy SF" model to other cities and towns throughout California.
As we discuss on the show, a critical next step for any city or town looking to replicate Healthy SF is to start organizing their community health clinics. Community clinics have historically provided services to uninsured and underserved populations. It's important for any health care effort at the local, state or federal level to include these crucial providers.
I hope you will listen to the show and let us know your thoughts and suggestions in the comment section as we work to create better health care service here and universal health care across California. As the President and Congress move to reform the health care system in Washington - the time is now to let your voice be heard.
Several weeks back, during the deepest throes of the budget crisis, I wrote that the problems of the state are not a matter of personality but process, and you can reason that out to understand that a change in the personalities without a concurrent change in process will accomplish absolutely nothing on reforming the state and getting a functional government again in California. This thought occurred to me again last night, as I sat in the press section during Gavin Newsom's "conversation with California" as part of his tour of the southern part of the state. Newsom's description of the challenges the state faces - and his solutions - gear more to the idea that a different person, dedicated to solving the same problems in a new way, can overcome any obstacle, rather than the reality that no individual under the current system of rules could possibly thrive. And while the San Francisco Mayor shows a recognition of the structural impossibility of California, his relative nonchalance about how to reform it shows he believes for more in himself to overcome the rules than the demonstrable history of the rules overcoming everyone in their path.
First, let's be clear that Newsom is running with someone else's platform. The first policy mentioned last night as a reflection of his record is the Healthy San Francisco effort toward universal care for the uninsured in his city. That is not his plan to tout, and the simultaneous description of it as a savior for the state's residents while cutting $100 million dollars from the city's Department of Public Health and programs aimed at the needy is nothing short of troubling.
"It's not that Healthy San Francisco is wrong its the mayor's obvious ..." (Tom Ammiano) pauses. "Look, he's running for governor and taking full credit for it. It's not true. The labor community, my office, community activists, health people -- some of the same people who are unhappy with him now -- worked with him on this. When he goes out there and claims full credit, that pisses people off, especially people who are dealing with [health care in the city] every day. ... The reaction is really based on the mayor boasting and overselling Healthy San Francisco." [...]
"Healthy San Francisco -- I think people should be very proud of it. I think it's going to meet its full potential. The rollout is going to be incremental and there's going to be little tweaks that it needs. But, you know, that's not the target [...] Unfortunately, it's getting tainted because of the mayor's boasting and overselling of it."
The neighborhood clinics at the heart of the Healthy San Francisco plan are at full capacity while funding is being slashed, and additional "woodworking" - residents coming out of the woodwork to seek services. The revenues aren't meeting the expenses, and the General Fund of the city, now facing a $590 million dollar shortfall (less per capita than Los Angeles'), has to make up the difference. As the economy continues to slow and the ranks of the unemployed swell, those at the bottom of the income ladder are already seeing service cuts. I would simply call it bad politics to put so much emphasis on a program you can barely claim ownership to and are cutting funding for at the same time as more services are desired. And this is sadly part of a pattern of the whole story being left out.
But let's set aside the issues for a moment. As focused as I am on process, I awaited Newsom's response to the inevitable questions about budget reform. He asserted support for a 50% + 1 threshold for the budget process, using the line "You need two-thirds of the vote to pass a budget, but only a simple majority to deny civil rights," referring to marriage equality. It's a good line, but he leaves out that he was shamed into changing his position after the initial proposal for a 55% threshold was slammed by just about everyone. The first instinct was to half-ass reform. There was also no explanation that there are two thresholds requiring two-thirds, the budget and tax increases, leaving his answer fairly vague, as it has been in the past.
But far worse than this was his flippant approval of Prop. 1A, the draconian spending cap that would effectively eliminate what amounts to half of the state school budget within a few years, and his dishonest rendering of the initiative as "a rainy day fund," without explaining how the rainy day fund is created. On the other ballot measures like 1C, 1D and 1E, which would privatize the lottery and raid voter-approved funds for children's programs and mental health, he gave a Solomonic "on the one hand, on the other hand" soliloquy and ended saying that he would be a bad spokesman for them.
This, then, is what needs to be kept in mind when Newsom urges a call for a constitutional convention. We see by his stances on the May special election what he would reasonably be expected to get out of that convention - a constitution that includes a "rainy day fund" created by a spending cap, coming at it from a right-wing perspective and ultimately resulting in a fake reform. This is essentially the position of Arnold Schwarzenegger, clueless media elites, bipartisan fetishists who assume without evidence the midpoint of any argument is automatically the best option, and most tellingly, the Bay Area Council, which makes perfect sense.
Meantime, the Schwarzenegger-sponsored political campaign in support of the six measures announced today an endorsement from the Bay Area Council, the business-centric public policy organization that is the impetus behind calls for a constitutional convention. Last week, Schwarzenegger made it quite clear that he supports the first convening of a state constitutional convention in some 150 years... a way to focus on multiple ideas for government reform at one time.
These two announcements certainly play to the idea of another "business vs. labor" narrative in California politics. Another possible fuel for that storyline comes in a $250,000 donation to the pro-budget measure committee on Friday by wealthy Orange County developer Henry Segerstrom. The donation from one of his companies is easily his largest campaign contribution in recent years, which saw smaller checks written to both the guv's 2006 reelection efforts and to the California Republican Party.
I support a Constitutional convention because I know what my principles are. I don't support mealy-mouthed calls for "reform" that are essentially corporate-friendly back doors to advance the interests of the powerful over the people.
Ultimately, Randy Shaw has this right - the people of California could elect Noam Chomsky, Warren Buffett or Howard Jarvis, and nothing would fundamentally change until the structures that restrict anyone in Sacramento from doing their jobs are released. And our assessment of who would be best to lead that reform should be based on deeds and not words.
If California's future is measured by our education system, we are in deep trouble. And we are in this difficulty because the state's Democratic Party and progressive activists have allowed right-wing Republicans to exert major control over the state's budget.
I say "allowed" because there is no other explanation for elected officials and activists failing to put a measure on the November 2008 ballot removing the 2/3 vote requirement to pass a budget. Although state Republicans made their opposition to new taxes clear, progressives passed up a large turnout ballot whose voters would have approved such a reform. Passage of such an initiative would have avoided the billions of dollars in cuts we went on to face, with more cuts slated for future years [...]
If we have learned anything from the past months, it should be that putting money into state candidates will accomplish less than passing the budgetary reforms and tax hikes needed to return California to its leadership in education and other areas [...]
It's time for the people to say "Yes We Can" to a new progressive future for California. Once the people lead, the politicians -- particularly those seeking their votes -- will follow.
It is senseless to discuss candidates for a race into a straitjacket, which is the current dress code for Sacramento. Anything less than fundamental reform will not solve the enormous set of problems the state faces - and it will take more than charisma, but an actual commitment, to make it happen.
Single-payer healthcare reform has a new bill number and a new sponsor. With my former State Senator Sheila Kuehl termed out, Mark Leno has stepped up to carry SB810, which in the past was known as SB840. The bill would, in the words of the press release, "guarantee comprehensive health care benefits to every California resident and streamline claims and reimbursements, which will save billions of dollars in health care administrative costs." Here's Sen. Leno:
"As a nation, we spend twice as much per person on health care as other wealthy countries, with the hope that our families will be protected from illnesses, yet most insured Americans still worry about how they will afford critical care if they become sick," said Senator Leno. "In California, 7 million people do not have health insurance. Wasteful health care spending is crushing our economy and forcing families to forego basic medical care. With the money we spend today on health care, California can have a modern, universal health care system that provides high quality care for everyone," he said.
A version of this bill has basically already passed the California Legislature, only to be vetoed by the Governor. So it shouldn't be a surprise that 43 lawmakers, including both leaders in the Assembly and Senate, have already signed on as co-sponsors.
Given the conservative veto and the 2/3 rule for revenue, SB810 lacks a funding source, so even if it were signed at some point - and realistically, Governor Schwarzenegger won't be the one to sign it - supporters wold have to go to the ballot to raise the necessary revenue to fund the bill.
There is no question that our health care delivery system is grossly inefficient, and insurance company profit and overhead is a pool of money that does little to provide quality care. As a nation we spend an extreme amount on health care - $2.4 trillion dollars in 2008, closing in on 20% of GDP - without a proportional increase in health care outcomes over the rest of the industrialized world. In fact, we pay more for care while ranking below dozens of nations in quality. Single-payer care, while varied in different nations across the world, has generally been proven to offer the best quality at the most reduced cost.
But of course, that is on a national level. And even though with 38 million people we have as many citizens as several other nations which have implemented single-payer, universal health care, what we lack is a printing press to coin our own money. Given the constraints of a balanced budget, given the far more onerous constraints of the conservative veto, and given that states have little control over the boom and bust cycles of the national economy, universal health plans have largely come ashore and beached when they are done at the state level. There are certainly reforms that can take place here, but we need the structural reform to set the table for them, and even with that, I am highly dubious (though willing to be convinced) that any state can manage UHC on their own without the tool of deficit spending that would occasionally be needed. And history bears this out.
(Not totally a local issue, but it involves a lot of local players, and continues on a subject that gets a lot of attention around here, so I thought I'd share. Reprinted from my site.)
There's something of a consensus that Netroots Nation didn't offer enough adversarial panels and instead largely consisted of bloggers agreeing with one another. But that's not true. I personally witnessed the most adversarial panel of the weekend, and it was spectacular, because finally, both factions of the debate about health care policy on the left were able to come together and understand the political contours of the brewing fight in the Congress.
Today marks the launch of Health Care For America Now, a national coalition which plans to organize millions of Americans at the grassroots level to advocate for quality, affordable health care for everyone.
We're bringing together community organizers, nurses, doctors, small business owners, faith-based groups, organizations of people of color, and seniors who believe it's time we had an American solution that provides quality, affordable health care for everyone.
We're offering a bold new solution that gives you real choice and a guarantee of quality coverage you can afford: keep your current private insurance plan, pick a new private insurance plan, or join a public health insurance plan.
We're also calling for regulation on health insurance companies. We need to set and enforce rules that quash health insurance companies' greed once and for all.There is a huge divide between our plan and the insurance companies' plan for healthcare reform. We want to make sure you have the quality coverage you need at the price you can afford. They want to leave you alone to fend for yourself in the unregulated, bureaucratic health insurance market.
Our plan is affordable for people and business. Their plan is profitable for them. With no regulation, health insurance companies can and will charge whatever they want, set high deductibles, and continue to drop coverage when you get sick. Now is the time to pick a side. Which side are you on?
Elizabeth Edwards is one of the high-profile faces of this coalition, but it's fairly broad, including AFSCME, Americans United for Change, Campaign for America's Future, Center for American Progress Action Fund, Center for Community Change, MoveOn.org, the NEA, National Women's Law Center, Planned Parenthood, the SEIU, the UFCW, and USAction. Today they are running live launch events all over the country, including two in California. One is happening at this hour in Los Angeles, featuring Lt. Governor John Garamendi. There's another event in San Francisco on the steps of City Hall at 11:30 featuring Mayor Gavin Newsom. The names shouldn't surprise you - they're both two of the most high-profile advocates for universal health care in the state, and they'll both use the issue as a springboard for their 2010 gubernatorial campaigns.
What I'm more interested in is HCAN's strategy to work inside Bush Dog districts to hold them accountable should they prostrate themselves for the insurance industry.
The work of Health Care For America Now was first made public late last week. But the group, with Elizabeth Edwards as a figurehead, offered expanded insight into the details of its campaign during a meeting on Monday. In addition to spending $40 million -- $1.5 million of which will be put behind an initial ad buy (national TV, print, and online) -- the group will be sending organizers to 52 cities, blasting out emails to 5 million households, airing spots on MSNBC and CNN and submitting op-eds to major papers (officials hinted at the New York Times piece to come).
In addition, the campaign is going to take advantage of Moveon.org's massive data files to reach out to like-minded supporters and officials promised to work in Democratic and Republican districts alike.
"We'll have an organizer in the district of every Blue Dog Democrat," said HCAN campaign manager Richard Kirsch of the conservative Democrats.
"The focus of the campaign," he added, "is on national legislation. "This year, however, it is also a referendum: do you support quality, affordable, health care for all, or an alliance with the private insurance industry?"
Right on. These Bush Dogs need constant pressure and the threat of job loss in order to do right by their constituents. I don't know how successful HCAN will be, but they certainly have the right strategy.
Dan Weintraub has a stupid column about single-payer health care that uses the same rhetoric that has locked us into a broken status quo for the history of the Republic. He claims that a new legislative analyst's report of the costs of SB840, if implemented today, would leave the state $40 billion dollars in the red after just one year. That's true, but as Sheila Kuehl explains, that's because health care costs have soared while wages remain stagnant, and thus the numbers from the original assessment of the bill are completely out of date. Weintraub then achnowledges this, but asserts that only 50 percent of the deficit can be attributed to a run-up in health care costs.
Of course, that's $20 billion dollars. And one element that Weintraub refuses to consider is cost control, which is the only way any fundamentally new health care system will survive, be it single payer or a collective-responsibility plan like that rejected by the State Senate last year. Weintraub never tries to factor in cost control. He never manages to analyze whether or not a system that takes middle men out of the process and removes the profit driver might be able to reduce the price of quality care. In the same way he never considers whether mandating that insurance companies spend a high percentage of premium revenue on treatment and care would reduce those costs he sees as fixed.
Spending on health care is out of control because there is a patchwork quilt of delivery services, diced up between insurers, hospitals, managed-care organizations, and other elements who add cost without impacting quality. It's, in short, an efficiency problem; the United States is grossly inefficient in its delivery of services, and despite superior technology and high spending has a life expectancy which trails 30 other countries and has the highest rate of underweight babies in 40 years, to cite just two examples. Subjecting a fiscal analysis of a system that would eliminate or sharply reduce the fiscal burden of this quilt to the old rules, and the old costs, makes no sense whatsoever. It's like doing an fiscal analysis in the 21st century of the naval budget, factoring in the effects of ships falling off edge of the world.
There's also the moral argument that we have over seventy million uninsured and underinsured Americans in a country which lists "life" as a fundamental inalienable right. But I'll shove that aside for a moment to deride Weintraub's limiting analysis.
In an extraordinary convention just concluding in Puerto Rico, here's what you didn't hear from Andy Stern's paid PR blitz. SEIU was under siege throughout by protest encampments of the popular Puerto Rican Teachers' Union, responding to SEIU's raid of the island's largest union-- during a strike to improve horrific educational conditions.
Inside the convention, to the detriment of the overall labor movement, Stern successfully squashed the internal dissent by SEIU's democracy activists, thereby further concentrating power in himself. The CEO model.
And in an extraordinary development, Stern announced that SEIU is basically doing away with labor reps in favor of outsourced call centers...which makes sense, in that if you sign no-strike promises to your employer, why would you need to mobilize your members?
There's more! SEIU is continuing its war against state and national RN unions by now picking up John McCain's frame of attacking "government-run healthcare" as their latest salvo against the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee (AFL-CIO). If anyone doubted SEIU's willingness to sell out genuine healthcare reform in a second, there it is.
RNs now celebrate Mary Seacole Day as part of National Nurses Week-and as the day we honor the social justice aspect of the work of nurses. Mary Seacole remains an important inspiration for the national nurses movement being built by CNA/NNOC (California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee), which focuses on improving patient care and safety in hospitals and on bringing this country the guaranteed, single-payer health care that our patients deserve.
Andy Stern's SEIU International has gone and proven why RNs want nothing to do with.
Even though they're providing the evidence for all the critiques of CNA/NNOC, today is a dark, dark day for the labor movement. Last night, in Dearborn Michigan, at an annual conference of union activists, sponsored by the non-partisal Labor Notes SEIU resorted to violence to get their messages across.
I will link to the release and pictures after the release.
I'm sure SEIU will come on here with some crazy spin justifying their violence, but please first answer these questions:
1. Will SEIU pay the bill of the hospitalized worker?
2. Will Andy Stern promise to renounce violence?
3. Will you aplogize to all involved?
4. Will we see the same tactics in other venues?
A major reason for the increasing controversy surrounding SEIU International has been their lack of commitment to genuine healthcare reform-and in fact their active attempts to undermine and sink patient-centered, single-payer reforms.
Progressive elements in the labor movement (and their own union) have long been aware of this problem, as have healthcare and single-payer activists around the country.
This story is now entering the wider public discussion as SEIU International embarks on new partnerships with corporate America and, all too often, Republican power brokers. We'll take a look, below, at their latest partnership, this one with the National Federation of Independent Business and the National Association of Realtors, to support a bill that hurts patients in the name of increasing insurance corporation profits-and, perhaps, winning employer sanction for SEIU organizing.
...for more background, please visit the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee's new site, ServingEmployersInsteadofUs.
4,000 brave women and men, RNs from the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee, are spending this week on the picket lines outside of Sutter Health Hospitals throughout Northern California, on a 10-day strike over patient care issues. Let me tell you about it, and introduce you to some of the RNs, because this is an important strike for a re-energized American labor movement and a key moment for the nation's battle for quality healthcare.
