policy – R&R – Reachout and Rebuild

Zeldin’s “War on drugs” ineffective

David Posnett — Thu, 02 Mar 2017 15:38:16 +0000

This letter appeared today March 1st in the East Hampton Press on page A7

Rep. Lee Zeldin writes about his health care goals in the Riverhead Local:

“… here in Suffolk County, our communities and families have been severely impacted by the rise of prescription drug abuse and the growing heroin crisis…”

He has been in office for over 2 years and the drug crisis has worsened dramatically. http://www.newsday.com/opinion/editorial/confronting-the-curse-of-opioids-and-heroin-1.11722083

As reported in April 2016, Suffolk County has the most heroin-related deaths in New York State. http://pix11.com/2016/04/10/suffolk-county-has-most-heroin-related-deaths-in-new-york-state-report-finds/

Rep. Zeldin’s says he will “continue working” on this problem and then proceeds with a list of uninspired old ideas. He says he wants to ”discuss and develop … solutions”.

This is a crisis best handled by drug-use professionals and requires national funding and action, immediately. Zeldin could declare this an emergency (like any medical emergency), he could attract top medical and drug abuse/addiction specialists and work with SUNY Stony Brook, other local hospitals and community centers.

Moreover, our new national government does not believe in institutions like the NIH and CDC and Mr. Zeldin does not seem to voice his concern about this. For example, there were directives freezing communications between NIH and congress: http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/01/memo-freezing-nih-communications-congress-triggers-jitters Note that the National Institutes on Drug Abuse (NIDA) is part of the NIH.

The CDC, notably, will lose 10% of its budget with repeal of the ACA. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-rsquo-s-cdc-may-face-serious-hurdles/

The drug abuse and heroin crisis is a healthcare emergency, as many families in the district know all to well. Rep. Zeldin’s promises to help, ring hollow. His lack of successful action over the last 2 years does not inspire confidence.

The #AmericanDream

David Posnett — Sat, 25 Feb 2017 18:41:29 +0000

(Pie and photo by Helen Atkinson-Barnes)

Author: Helen Atkinson-Barnes, published in this week’s Sag Harbor Express

Why are all these people protesting? I’ve been hearing this question since the day after the election, when college students across the country, including my daughter, first flooded in to the streets. I continue to hear this question asked – sometimes sincerely other times cynically – following more recent uprisings. Many seem bewildered or incensed, by the Women’s March, the spontaneous airport demonstrations against the immigrant ban, the uproar on social media and in the press about conflicts of interest, and the flood of visits, phone calls and letters to members of congress.

I’ve also heard those questioning the protests answer their own question by dismissing people speaking out as “senseless,” “unpatriotic,” or even as just a bunch of “whiny,
spoiled brats.” I would reply by saying that these protests are as American as apple pie.

We who speak out are doing so in an effort to protect the principles that make this country great. In accordance with these ideals, the protests so far have been overwhelmingly positive and peaceful. To borrow from Martin Luther King Jr: We have a dream.

We have a dream of a respectful nation: that no matter who you are–no matter your color, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, income, religion, age, disability, or country-of-origin–we are all members of the human race. We all have the right to be treated fairly and to be measured by our deeds and not by our identities.

We have a dream of an informed and thoughtful nation: with public education for all and a free and honest press celebrating truth and the open exchange of ideas.

We have a dream of a healthy nation: where all people are protected from disease and unsafe conditions and are able to get care when they are sick.

We have a dream of a pristine nation: with unspoiled public parks for all to visit, clean water for all to drink, pure air for all breathe, and a safe climate for all to inhabit.

We have a dream of a connected and accessible nation: with well-repaired public roads and bridges; walkways, waterways, and parks; public transportation and telecommunications.

We have a dream of a safe nation: a place where people can live free from the fear of international terrorism and of domestic violence, of street violence and of systemic
violence.

We have a dream of an open nation: not a country that is shut off behind walls, punitive tariffs, and immigration bans, but instead interconnected with the world to boost prosperity and peace through trade and travel.

Haven’t we all been taking this dream for granted? These values are under attack by those in our government who would trample on the truth with “alternative facts,” stir up fear and resentment or use power for personal advantage.

Civilization depends upon civic engagement, which must not end at the ballot box. I hear too many people say, “Suck it up, it’s out of your hands now,” or “It’s just too painful to pay attention.” I get it. But it also can be empowering to take action. And while we need to pace ourselves, and pick our battles, at the very least we should try.

Like apple pie, protest is sweetly and deeply American. Whether individual or collective, a conversation or a rally, written or spoken, somber or satiric, painted, sung or knit–peaceful protest is not just a right in the United States, but a responsibility that is essential to the preservation and defense of democracy and our shared American Dream.

Fascist regime or not?

David Posnett — Thu, 09 Feb 2017 06:28:49 +0000

Interesting comparison of present day America with Germany in the 1930s. Format is an interview with Isabel Virginia Hull, professor of history at Cornell University and one of the foremost scholars on modern Germany. Full article here:

http://gothamist.com/2017/02/06/trump_bannon_german_history.php

Some quotes:

Steve Bannon, is the closest thing to a genuine fascist that I’ve seen ever in American government—and the removal in the National Security Council of the military leaders. That’s extraordinary and unprecedented.

Bannon is not a security expert. He’s not an expert in government at all. That’s one thing. The second thing is the fact that the Trump Administration didn’t engage in a transition. They were uninterested in both the documents prepared by the Obama administration and in meeting with the heads of the various divisions of government. The third thing is the purge of the senior-most officials in the State Department. The fourth thing is the order banning Muslims—and that’s what it is—the manner in which that happened, the process, which is to say a small group of advisers with no government experience keeping it secret and then launching it. That’s also unprecedented.

… these people want to remove the normal functioning of government and to replace the adepts at government—the people with experience and knowledge—with toadies who will do whatever they tell them to do.

…I have a very high bar to call somebody that and my bar is a pretty well-formed ideology, a really fanatical attachment to it, and a rigidity in not modifying it. I don’t think Trump fits that bill. I think Steve Bannon might fit that bill. And the question then is: Who’s running the government? Is it Steve Bannon or is it Donald Trump? And Donald Trump’s inability to keep his mind on anything for more than 15 seconds would suggest that he’s a character much more like Kaiser Wilhelm II than Adolf Hitler. These are the thoughts that a German historian has….

Medicine for the One Percent

David Posnett — Mon, 21 Apr 2014 13:27:56 +0000

We always suspected this: a new study clearly shows that the richer you are, the longer you live in the US of America (Wall Street Journal). This is no small difference! The top 10% (richest) people live on average 10 years longer than the bottom 10% (poorest). Wow! And this is WITH medicare and medicaid, which the political right would have us get rid of all together.

What I would like to see are 2 things.

(1) A comparison with a similar study in civilized “1st world” countries (Canada, UK, Germany, France, Switzerland, Netherlands, etc.) with better health care coverage that covers the entire population.

(2) A historical comparison: an analysis of life expectancy relative to individual wealth 100 , 50, 20 and 10 years ago in the US. I would like to know whether we have made any progress, and whether (as I suspect) progress has been halted or even reversed.

It will take at least 10-50 years for the effects of Obamacare to show up in such a population wide analysis which measures death rates over many years. At present, only a comparison with other countries can tell us something.

Here is a partial response to my question (2) from the article itself which looks at least at 2 different historical time points: 1920 versus 1940. For men there has been an improvement in longevity (5.9% for the richest men and 1.7% for the poorest men). For women the change in longevity is 3.1% for the richest women. But the poorest women actually live less long -2.1%. This means that if you are a poor woman, you actually would have been better off being born in 1920 rather than in 1940! That is a stunning fact. It is the reverse of progress.

Soaring Costs of Prescription Drugs in the US

David Posnett — Sun, 06 Apr 2014 15:09:35 +0000

Great article about the soaring costs of prescription drugs in the US. The very same drugs are offered in other countries like Germany and the UK etc, at a small fraction of what we are asked to pay. Who benefits? The drug companies. Since most countries have government limits on the costs of drugs, the drug companies make less of a profit in those countries (but still enough to continue selling there). To make up for what they view as insufficient margins, they go crazy with the prices in the US, where there are no government limits. The free market just doesn’t work when it comes to life saving medicines. Unless you decide that only the lives of the rich are worth saving.

The ACA seems to be working…

David Posnett — Mon, 24 Mar 2014 03:32:16 +0000

Robert Reich discusses the ACA which seems to be working. But there is a lot that needs fixing. Above all what needs fixing is the oft deceitful misinformation. Read on here! Contributed by Arlene Coulter.

Opting out of Medicare Expansion is costing lives: over 7,100 deaths nation wide!

David Posnett — Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:35:29 +0000

Interesting study (by a Harvard medical student). It is an estimate of the total numbers of people that will be covered by insurance with/without medicare expansion. They they use prior estimates of how non-coverage translates in to real death rates.

For example

NY (which has opted in):

currently uninsured 2 185 195
projected uninsured with ACA 1 122 130 (49% decline in uninsured)

PA (which has opted out)

currently uninsured 1 520 622
projected uninsured with ACA 1 229 171 (19.2% decline in uninsured)

How Many Young Invincibles does the ACA need?

David Posnett — Mon, 27 Jan 2014 19:58:45 +0000

What numbers really are needed to make the ACA sustainable? This is a big concern of Rep. Tim Bishop’s and others who fear that too few healthy young people paying in to offset older, sicker enrollees, may drive premiums higher next year. The doom and gloom over fairly low numbers of young adults enrolling in the exchanges is exaggerated, says research by the Kaiser Family Foundation, a leading non-partisan think tank on health policy.

Here’s their analysis on how many enrollees are needed to make the math work and keep premiums reasonable. The number is lower than we think. Contributed by Liz McMillan.

Republican Converts to Obamacare

David Posnett — Thu, 23 Jan 2014 21:02:33 +0000

It is strange how I have been hearing about right wing oponents of Obamacare. When they get really ill, and the situation is life threatening, some of them convert to Obamacare supporters. Its interesting to read these stories (I think). Here is a story about a young Republican operative with testicular cancer!

And meet Butch Matthews from Arkansas too.

Bail-out of the Insurance Industry?

David Posnett — Tue, 21 Jan 2014 18:11:21 +0000

The Huffington Post has a nice Wendell Potter article addressing how exactly we “bail out” the insurance industry.

The Pot Is Calling the Kettle Black in This Feigned Obamacare Outrage

Here are the highlights:
… In many cases, insurers refused to sell coverage at any price to prospective customers with preexisting conditions. That’s a big reason why the number of uninsured Americans had reached nearly 50 million when Congress passed the reform law.
So it wasn’t the least bit surprising that the first few million who have signed up for coverage since the exchanges opened on Oct. 1 skew older than many expected. People who have been denied coverage for years are far more motivated to get insurance …

In anticipation of this, drafters of the reform law established a $25-billion risk fund to insulate insurers from big losses during the first three years…

Yes, $25 billion is a lot of money, but it is pocket change compared to the enormous amount of taxpayer dollars that have been flowing to private insurance companies for nearly three decades to keep them in the Medicare Advantage program, which has had the unwavering support of Republicans…

We’re talking a lot of money here. In 2012 alone, the GAO calculated that the federal government spent about $135 billion on the Medicare Advantage program….

Interestingly, but not surprisingly, there was no mention of that, or any reference at all to the Medicare Advantage program, the biggest champion of which are Republicans, in The Weekly Standard‘s “bailout” story last week. If they are sincere in their alarm that Obamacare might reward private insurers with an extra $25 billion between now and the end of 2016, they should be apoplectic about the ongoing bailout known as the Medicare Advantage program.