DAILY MAIL– Patients have lost access to hundreds of herbal medicines today, after European regulations came into force.
Sales of all herbal remedies, except for a small number of popular products for ‘mild’ illness such as echinacea for colds and St John’s Wort for depression have been banned.
For the first time traditional products must be licensed or prescribed by a registered herbal practitioner.
Both herbal remedy practitioners and manufacturers fear they could be forced out of business as a result.
Some of the most commonly used products were saved after the Health Secretary Andrew Lansley approved a plan for the Health
Professions Council to establish a register of practitioners supplying unlicensed herbal medicines.
However, many remedies were lost as it was only open to those who could afford the licensing process which costs between £80,000 to £120,000.
AP– A bill that would have provided up to $7.4 billion in aid to people
sickened by World Trade Center dust fell short in the House on Thursday,
raising the possibility that the bulk of compensation for the ill will
come from a legal settlement hammered out in the federal courts.
The
bill would have provided free health care and compensation payments to
9/11 rescue and recovery workers who fell ill after working in the trade
center ruins.
It failed to win the needed two-thirds majority,
255-159. The vote was largely along party lines, with 12 Republicans
joining Democrats supporting the measure.
For weeks, a judge and
teams of lawyers have been urging 10,000 former ground zero workers to
sign on to a court-supervised settlement that would split $713 million
among people who developed respiratory problems and other illnesses
after inhaling trade center ash.
The court deal shares some
similarities with the aid program that the federal legislation would
have created, but it involves far less money. Only the most seriously
ill of the thousands of police officers, firefighters and construction
workers suing New York City over their exposure to the dust would be
eligible for a hefty payout.
But supporters of the deal have been
saying the court settlement is the only realistic option for the sick,
because Congress will never act.
REUTERS– Americans spend twice as much as residents of other developed countries on
healthcare, but get lower quality, less efficiency and have the least equitable
system, according to a report released on Wednesday.
The United States
ranked last when compared to six other countries – Britain,
Canada, Germany, Netherlands,
Australia and New
Zealand, the Commonwealth Fund report found.
“As an American it just bothers me that
with all of our know-how, all of our wealth, that we are not assuring that
people who need healthcare can get it,” Commonwealth Fund president Karen
Davis told reporters in a telephone briefing.
Previous reports by the nonprofit fund, which
conducts research into healthcare performance and promotes changes in the U.S.
system, have been heavily used by policymakers and politicians pressing for
healthcare reform.
Davis
said she hoped health reform legislation passed in March would lead to
improvements.
The current report uses data from nationally
representative patient and physician surveys in seven countries in 2007, 2008,
and 2009. It is available here
In 2007, health spending was $7,290 per
person in the United States,
more than double that of any other country in the survey. Australians spent $3,357, Canadians $3,895,
Germans $3,588, the Netherlands
$3,837 and Britons spent $2,992 per capita on health in 2007. New
Zealand spent the least at $2,454.
JUAN GONZALEZ: The House Democratic leadership is getting
close to having enough votes to pass its massive healthcare reform
legislation that aims to extend coverage to more than 30 million people
while forcing millions of Americans to buy private health insurance.
Wednesday saw three key developments for the Democrats.
Congressman Dennis Kucinich of Ohio announced he would switch his vote
and support the legislation, even though the bill does not create a
public option. Kucinich’s decision came two days after he spoke with
President Obama aboard Air Force One on their way to a rally in his
district. Congressman Dale Kildee of Michigan, an anti-abortion
Democrat, also said he would back the bill. And a group representing
59,000 Catholic nuns endorsed the legislation. The Democratic leadership
is hoping the nuns’ support will give political cover for anti-abortion
Democrats still on the fence.
Meanwhile, intense pressure is being made on Democrats who
originally voted against the bill. In recent days, President Obama has
met privately with at least half-a-dozen dissenting Democrats at the
White House. He has lobbied other lawmakers by phone.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said the House could take a
final vote on the Senate healthcare bill by Sunday. House Speaker Nancy
Pelosi also is considering passing the bill using a procedural tactic
known as “deem and pass” that would avoid a direct House vote on the
full Senate bill.
AMY GOODMAN: In a moment we’ll be joined by Congress
member Dennis Kucinich in Washington, but first we turn to his news
conference yesterday.
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: I know I have to make a
decision, not on the bill as I would like to see it, but as it is. My
criticism of the legislation has been well reported. I do not retract
those criticisms. I incorporate them into this statement. They stand as
legitimate and cautionary. I have doubts about the bill. I do not think
it is a step toward anything I’ve supported in the past. This is not the
bill I wanted to support, even as I continue efforts until the last
minute to try to modify the bill.
However, after careful discussions with President Obama, Speaker
Pelosi, my wife Elizabeth and close friends, I’ve decided to cast a vote
in favor of the legislation. If my vote is to be counted, let it count
now for passage of the bill, hopefully in the direction of comprehensive
healthcare reform.
AMY GOODMAN: Congressman Kucinich, speaking on Wednesday.
Well, last week, the Ohio Democrat appeared on Democracy Now!
voicing his opposition to the bill.
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: I’m ready to listen to the White
House, if the White House is ready to listen to the concerns about
putting a public option in this bill. I mean, they can do that. You
know, they’re still cutting last-minute deals. Put the public option
back in. Make it a robust public option. Give the people a chance to
really negotiate rates with the insurance companies, where—from the
standpoint of having a public option. But don’t just tell the people
that you’re going to call this healthcare reform, when you’re giving
insurance companies an even more powerful monopoly status in our
economy.
AMY GOODMAN: Congress member Dennis Kucinich joins us now in
Washington, DC.
Well, Congress member Kucinich, you did not get what you were
asking for, yet you are now supporting this bill. Explain what happened
and why you think this bill merits your support.
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, first of all, I appreciate
that you covered that part where I said that I don’t retract anything
that I said before. I had taken the effort to put a public option into
the bill and also to create an opportunity for states to have their
right protected to pursue single payer. I took it all the way down to
the line with the President, the Speaker of the House, Democratic
leaders. And it became clear to me that, despite my best efforts, I
wasn’t going to be able to get it in the bill and that I was going to
inevitably be looking at a bill that—where I was a decisive vote and
that I was basically, by virtue of circumstances, being put in a
position where I could either kill the bill or let it go forward and—in
the hopes that we could build something from the ruins of this bill.
I think that—you know, I mean, I can just tell you, it was a very
tough decision. But I believe that now we need to look to support the
efforts at the state level for single payer, to really jump over this
debate and not have all those who want to see transformative change in
healthcare be blamed for this bill going down. I think that really it’s a
dangerous moment. You know, the Clinton healthcare reforms, which I
thought were very weak, it’s been sixteen years since we’ve had a
discussion about healthcare reform because of the experience of the
political maelstrom that hit Washington. And I saw—I came to the
conclusion, Amy, that it was going to—it would be impossible to start a
serious healthcare discussion in Washington if this bill goes down,
despite the fact that I don’t like it at all. And every criticism I made
still stands.
I want to see this as a step. It’s not the step that I wanted to
take, but a step so that after it passes, we can continue the discussion
about comprehensive healthcare reform, about what needs to be done at
the state level, because that’s really where we’re going to have to, I
think, have a breakthrough in single payer, about diet, nutrition,
comprehensive alternative medicine. There’s many things that we can do.
But if the bill goes down and we get blamed for it, I think there’ll be
hell to pay, and in the end, it’ll just be used as an excuse as to why
Washington couldn’t get to anything in healthcare in the near future.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Congressman, I’d like to ask you, several
other members of Congress who have had discussions with President Obama
in recent days, as he sought their support, have said that he has
essentially told them that this is—his presidency is riding on this,
that to defeat the bill would severely hamper the remaining time in his
presidency and also the election in November. Did he make that argument
to you, as well? And did that have any impact on your decision?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: We talked about that. I mean, I have
been thinking for quite awhile about, you know, what this means in
terms of the Obama presidency. And frankly, you know, I’ve had
differences with this president, on the economy, on environment, on war.
And so, you know, I really hadn’t given them many votes at all. But he
made—he did make the argument that there was a lot on the line. And
frankly, there’s been such an effort to delegitimatize his presidency,
right from the beginning, that, you know, in looking at the big picture
here, we have to see if there’s a way to get into this administration
with an argument that could possibly influence the President to take
some new directions. Standing at the sidelines, I think, is not an
option right now, because, you know, we have to try to reshape the Obama
presidency. And I hope that, in some small way, through my
participation in trying to take healthcare in a new direction, that I
can help do that.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d also like to ask you about this whole
issue of the procedure, this “deem and pass” procedure. There have been
several folks in recent days who have questioned whether this is even
constitutional. It was a former—a former federal appeals judge Mike
McConnell, in the Wall Street Journal, questioned it, as have
some lawyers from Public Citizen, whether it is constitutional for the
House, in effect, not to really vote on the Senate—on the version that
was passed in the Senate.
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, you know, I can tell you, as
far as myself, I’m ready to vote on anything they send down. What the
process is, I’m not sure how that’s going to work out. I think it may
depend on how many votes that the leaders in both the Senate and the
House believe they have. I really haven’t been involved in that
discussion.
And, you know, I—look, I can’t give any kind of process a
blessing. I don’t like much of anything of what’s happening here, except
to say that I think that down the road we need to jump over this debate
and go right to a bigger debate about how do we get healthcare that’s
significant, how do we supplant the role of private insurers. We’re not
going to be able to do it on this pass. I have done everything that I
possibly can to try to take a position and stake out ground to say I’m
not going to change, but there’s a point at which you say, you know,
it’s my way or the highway. And if the highway shows a roadblock and you
go over a cliff, I don’t know what good that does, when you take a
detour and maybe we can still get to the destination, which, for me,
remains single payer. Start at the state level, and do the work there.
And if there’s ERISA implications and lawsuits, we’ll have to deal with
that, and maybe that can force Congress to finally act on some of those
issues.
AMY GOODMAN: Congress member Kucinich, have you ever—
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Deem and pass, whatever they do, I
don’t know.
AMY GOODMAN: Have you ever received as much pressure as
you’re getting right now, as you have gotten right now, right down to
your flight on Air Force One with President Obama?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: The pressure doesn’t really come so
much from the outside. I mean, I had people who are for this and against
it with equal intensity. What the pressure comes from, being told that
you might be singularly responsible for the passage or failure of an
initiative and having to live with the implications of that.
Amy, I did not want to be in the House on Sunday night with my
voting card, you know, and a finger in the wind about what to do. And
looking at the bigger picture here, I’m hopeful that in making this
decision to switch in favor of voting for the bill, that we can use this
opportunity to, down the road, push for the kind of health reform that I
am for, that I stand for, that I’ve worked my life for. But it’s not
going to happen in this bill. And there’s a point at which you just have
to maturely look at the situation as it is and say, no matter what I
do, it’s not going to change this bill. And I’ve tried harder than
anyone, but, you know, it’s just not going to happen. So—
AMY GOODMAN: Congress member Kucinich, we’re going to
break and then come back to this discussion. We just have to break for a
minute. Congress member Kucinich, speaking to us from Washington after
he has decided to support the healthcare reform bill. We’ll also be
joined by longtime consumer advocate Ralph Nader. Stay with us.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: We’re joined now by Congress member Dennis
Kucinich of Ohio, who will be voting for the healthcare reform bill, and
longtime consumer advocate Ralph Nader. Both of them, Ralph Nader and
Dennis Kucinich, have run for president of the United States several
times.
Ralph Nader, your response to the healthcare reform bill and
Congress member Kucinich’s position?
RALPH NADER: Well, this is the latest chapter of corporate
Democrats crushing progressive forces both inside their party and
against third parties. There’s nothing new here. It’s being pointed out
in my former running mate’s autobiography, the late Peter Camejo, which
is coming out in a couple weeks from Chicago.
What we’re seeing here is a legislation that doesn’t even kick in
until 2014, except for one or two items on staying with your parents’
insurance policy until you’re twenty-six. That means that there will be
180,000 Americans who will die between now and 2014 before any coverage
expands, and hundreds of thousands of injuries and illnesses untreated.
This bill does not provide universal, comprehensive or affordable care
to the American people. It shovels hundreds and billions of dollars of
taxpayer money into the worst corporations who’ve created this problem:
the Aetnas, the CIGNAs, the health insurance companies. And it doesn’t
require many contractual accountabilities and other accountabilities for
people who are denied healthcare in this continuing pay-or-die system
that is the disgrace of the Western world.
For the drug companies, it’s a bonanza. It doesn’t require Uncle
Sam to negotiate volume discounts. It allows these new biologic drugs,
under patent, to fight off generic competition—that’s a terrible
provision. And it doesn’t allow reimportation from countries like Canada
to keep prices down.
Congressman Kucinich’s points are not respected, either. There is
no public choice or public option in order to keep prices down, so it’s
an open sesame for these giant insurance companies that are
concentrating more and more power, in violation of the antitrust laws,
over the millions of American patients. And it doesn’t safeguard the
states from the kind of litigation that’s heading toward Pennsylvania
and California, that are now trying single payer.
So what we should recognize is nothing is really going to happen
in this bill, if it’s passed, until 2014, because there’s a gap here,
including a presidential campaign and the contest in 2012 and a
congressional elections in 2010, for the single-payer supporters in this
country. Majority of the American people, majority doctors and nurses,
support single payer. They’ve supported Dennis Kucinich all over the
country on this. They have supported singlepayeraction.org,
which I hope a million people will visit in the next few days in their
outrage over what’s happening here.
So I think what we have to do, Amy, is see this as a four-year
gap before this bill kicks in and try to get the single payer as a major
issue in the 2010 campaign and as a major issue in the 2012 campaign
and try to save some of those 180,000 Americans that will die because
they cannot afford health insurance to get diagnosed or treated. And
that figure comes from Harvard Medical School researchers.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Ralph, I would like to ask you, though,
what about the issue that Representative Kucinich raises, that at least
if this bill is passed, there will continue to be debates and battles in
Congress over reform of it, whereas if it was to be defeated, then the
likelihood is that for years down the road there would not be another
effort at healthcare reform?
RALPH NADER: I think both—you know, the Democrats are
basically saying, if you don’t pass this bill, we won’t have a chance
for another ten and fifteen years. And if the bill is passed, they’re
going to say, “OK, that’s behind us. We now have to pay attention to all
the other issues on our plate.” So the mindset of the Pelosis and the
Hoyers, the people who run the House of Representatives, is that this is
it for ten or fifteen years.
And the American people have got to say, no, this isn’t it. Now,
Dennis is—you know, Dennis is subject to retaliation if he didn’t
support this bill in the House of Representatives. And, you know, you
have to have empathy with him on that. He’s got a subcommittee. He’s got
to live with these corporate Democrats. But the American people are not
subject to that kind of retaliation, and they really have to mobilize
now, at the state level, try to get some of the state bills through and
demonstrate the effectiveness of full Medicare for all with free choice
of doctor and hospital. There’s no free choice of doctor and hospital
under this. There’s all kinds of exploitations that the health insurance
companies and drug companies are going to be free to continue their
ravenous ways over people who are at their most vulnerable situation,
when they’re sick and injured. So, you know, we really have to look at
this—
AMY GOODMAN: Congress member Kucinich, your response to
what Ralph Nader is saying, that this is a boondoggle for the health
insurance companies, that that’s what this is all about, and that you
did this because you’re subject to serious retaliation in the House?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, you know, I wasn’t thinking
about anyone retaliating, because, as I said, I’m looking at a picture
of, does this enable us to keep the healthcare discussion going?
Now, Ralph Nader, who is someone who I respect greatly, is right
when he says that we need to continue to move forward with a
single-payer movement. That’s what I want. That’s been what I’ve worked
my politic—almost my entire political life towards. And so, I support
what he said in that regard and look forward to working with him. We
need to—well, while it’s said there’s, you know, an ongoing discussion
about healthcare if this passes, we need to make sure that happens,
particularly at a state level. And, you know, that’s why I’ve also
fought so hard to try to keep the ERISA pre-emption waiver alive as an
issue, but it’s not happening in this bill.
And I realize, as does Ralph Nader, not just the limitations of
this bill, but why the whole system is wrong. But, you know, there’s a
point at which you are in the system and you have to figure out, is
there a way to try to use the moment to move in a direction that gives
you a chance to keep pushing the point and not lose total legitimacy by
taking everything over a cliff, at least working inside the system. And
so, that’s kind of what I’ve been faced with here. But it’s beyond me.
This isn’t about me. When you have to make a vote that’s decisive, then
it is about what you think. But I just tell Ralph Nader that I
appreciate his continued integrity and willingness to keep pushing
single payer even at this dark moment. And I agree that’s what we need
to do.
AMY GOODMAN: Congress member Kucinich, if your vote was
that important—I think many progressives feel that the White House
responds to conservatives who withhold their vote and changes, like on
issues of choice, if that’s what it’s going to take to get the bill
passed. What about having held out to the end and demanded—you know, put
your demand on the table, since this is so critical to the White House?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Yeah, you know, I—I mean, I,
frankly, was quite surprised that as we were approaching a moment of
decision, people wouldn’t budge on the question of the public option and
wouldn’t budge on the question of a ERISA waiver. Remember, I was one
of seventy-seven Democrats who said—progressives who said, look, if the
public option isn’t in the final bill—this was the bill that we passed
last year—you know, I’m not going to vote for it. Well, there are only
two members of Congress who actually kept that pledge. I was one of
those two. So now—and, you know, the other one was Mr. Massa, who’s no
longer in the Congress. So now I’m basically left standing alone with a
position that I’ve held consistently.
And, Amy, I’ll tell you that one of the things that surprised me
the most is that even though they said everything’s on the line and even
though they said it could come down to one vote and pointed at me and
said, “That could be your vote,” they still wouldn’t budge on it. So
then, I’m—and I mean, I tested and probed and talked to everybody, all
the way down the chain of leadership, to see if there’s any way, and
frankly, it’s mystifying, except to say that they’re keeping a
for-profit system intact. There’s no air in here to try to find a way to
get to a not-for-profit system. So I have to make the decision within
the context of where we are and to see if, you know, by making that
decision, down the road that we can keep the healthcare debate going.
But this is about a for-profit system, something I don’t endorse. But
the opportunity to stay in the debate about single payer is still there,
without anybody using it as an excuse to say, “Well, you took the whole
thing over the cliff, and who wants to talk to you about anything
anymore?”
JUAN GONZALEZ: Ralph Nader, what about this issue of the—
RALPH NADER: Well, let me just say, you know, Dennis—
JUAN GONZALEZ: Ralph Nader, what about this issue of the
seventy-seven other members of Congress who pledged not to support this
bill? We’ve had quite a few of them on this show—Raul Grijalva, Anthony
Weiner. What about the others who also have gradually agreed to support
this bill?
RALPH NADER: They’ve all caved. They’ve all been put into
line by the majority rulers in the House. So that’s not going to change,
Juan.
What—I think Dennis Kucinich has been known as the great
dissenter in the Democratic Party—against the criminal wars of
aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan, for impeaching Bush and Cheney, for
single payer, on and on. His subcommittee hearings, which are almost
never covered by the press, provide a standard for what House
subcommittees should be investigating all over the country. But I think
he owes an explanation to hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of
progressive Americans, many of whom who watch this show, who have
clinged to Dennis Kucinich as the great dissenter, as the principled
person, as the person who will hold the banner high. “The Star-Spangled
Banner” has this phrase, “And the flag was still there.” But for the
progressives in this country, they want to keep saying, “And Dennis
Kucinich was still there.” So I would like him to go all over the
country, after this malicious vote by the Democrats in the House, and
address audiences all over, starting a complete new wave for full
Medicare for all before this bill kicks in in 2014, so all the members
running for reelection in 2010 are going to have to face it.
And I hope people will visit the videos that are on singlepayeraciton.org to
show how many of his colleagues react when they’re confronted with a
reporter asking the question, “The majority of the American people,
doctors and nurses want this system. They want free choice of doctor and
hospital. They want the insurance companies displaced with full single
payer. Why aren’t you for it?” You look at their faces as they try to
squirm out of that. That’s the moral position. They know it. But they’re
caving into the enormous lobbying power of the drug and insurance
companies, which are deploying over 2,000 full-time lobbyists on Capitol
Hill as we speak.
AMY GOODMAN: Dennis Kucinich, your response? And also to
Jane Hamsher, founder of Firedoglake, who asked if you were going to be
giving back the money to people who gave to you all over the country
because you said you would not support healthcare reform without a
public option?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: First of all, with respect to Jane
Hamsher, I talked to her yesterday, and I also indicated through my
campaign early yesterday that anybody who contributed, you know, with
the hopes that I was going to vote against the legislation unless it had
a public option, that of course they’re going to get their money back,
because I changed my position.
Now, with respect to what Ralph Nader just said about the need to
keep a strong public—a strong single-payer campaign going, absolutely. I
mean, you know, I haven’t changed my position one bit on single payer.
I’m not suddenly saying, “Oh, gee, this for-profit model is something we
ought to consider.” I don’t like it. I just want to make sure that
everyone understands that the minute this bill is done, reforms within
the context of a for-profit system, we have to accelerate that, and at
the same time, a parallel track of continuing to pursue single payer. I
agree with Ralph Nader on that.
RALPH NADER: Imagine, the system costs twice as much per
capita, about $7,600 per capita, than similar—than single-payer systems
in Canada and Germany and France. They cover everybody for half the
price per capita that we’re paying here, when 50 million people aren’t
covered and thousands die every year. Eight hundred die every week,
because they can’t afford health insurance to get treatment and
diagnosis. And we’ve got—
AMY GOODMAN: Ralph Nader, what about the fact that—
RALPH NADER: —hundreds of billions of dollars in
Afghanistan and Iraq.
AMY GOODMAN: What about the—
RALPH NADER: Really, it’s time for the American people to
get upset.
AMY GOODMAN: Ralph Nader, what about the fact that thirty
more million people will be covered under this, no matter how much you
feel it is lacking, under this healthcare reform bill?
RALPH NADER: First of all, that won’t even begin until
2014, 180,000 dead Americans later. Second, there’s no guarantee of
that. The insurance companies can game this system. The 2,500 pages is
full of opportunities and ambiguities for the insurance companies to
game the system and to make it even worse.
And let’s say there are more people covered, right? Well, they’re
being forced to buy junk insurance policies. There’s no regulation of
insurance prices. There’s no regulation of the antitrust laws on this.
Everything went down that Dennis was fighting for. There’s no regulation
that prevents the insurance companies from taking this papier-mâché
bill and lighting a fire to it and making a mockery of it. There’s no
shift of power. There’s no facility to create a national consumer health
organization, which we proposed and the Democrats ignored years ago, in
order to give people a voice so they can have their own non-profit
consumer lobby on Washington.
AMY GOODMAN: Dennis Kucinich, let me ask you something.
RALPH NADER: This is really a disaster.
AMY GOODMAN: Let me ask Congress member Kucinich, do you
think if President Obama had done the same arm twisting and enormous
pressure and paying attention and speaking to legislator after
legislator on this, if he had done this at the point where single—where
public option was on the table, it would have made a difference, if he
had weighed in like this before?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: I think that right after the
swearing in of President Obama, there was a climate for transformational
change. I think it’s still there. And I think the President could
really be instrumental in bringing about just about any kind of change
that he wants. For whatever reason, he decided to carefully construct a
plan that would admit no chance for any real challenge to the market
structure of private, for-profit insurance companies. And, you know, and
he’s worked very tightly within that system. That’s a choice that he
made. And during the campaign, you know, he made it very clear that he
wasn’t for single payer. He made it very clear that he was looking at
reforms within the context of the for-profit system. I mean, that’s a
choice that he made. And, you know, it’s not the choice that I would
have made, but he’s the president. And if his presidency is on the line,
he made the choice for that. But at the same time, we have to look at
the consequences of what happens if it fails.
And, you know, one of the things that Ralph Nader said—you know,
you have to keep in mind, Ralph, that the House did pass, three weeks
ago, a bill that for the first time took away the antitrust exemptions
that insurance companies had. You know, we’ll have to see what happens
with it in the Senate. It’s interesting that it passed without virtually
any recognition in the larger media. It’s as though that was chopped
liver. That was a big deal.
The insurance companies—you know, as someone who is going to vote
for this bill, I’ve taken on additional responsibility to monitor an
industry that’s proven itself to be predatory, but at the same time I
just want to go back to what Ralph Nader said about the need to keep and
hold fast to a single-payer movement, that that has to happen. You
know, I am not about to abandon that. I made that clear yesterday; I’ll
make it clear again now. Single payer is the only real solution. This is
really a debate within the context of a for-profit system, something
that I did not relish and something that I’m looking forward to
continuing to try to change. I’ve worked on this my whole life. I’m not
about to stop now. But I looked at the moment and thought that it would
be a mistake to be the one who sends this thing down to defeat and hope
that then I can play a role to try to build some fragments from the
ruins to try to create some kind of healthcare system and have
credibility to do it.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Congressman—Congressman Kucinich—
RALPH NADER: You know, one thing President Obama said—
JUAN GONZALEZ: Ralph, one second, I’d like to ask
Congressman Kucinich one other question, in terms of the role of the
labor unions in all of this effort. Obviously the Obama administration
has gotten quite a bit of cover in its efforts to reform health
insurance from organizations like SEIU that basically agreed early on to
try to cut a deal with the insurance industry on what kind of health
reform would occur and then recently threatened to seek to unseat those
who wouldn’t vote for this plan. Your sense of how the role of the labor
unions, especially SEIU, in the bill that is now before the House?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: Well, labor is not a monolith. The
SEIU has been strongly supportive of this, but there are also trade
unions that have been leery of the ERISA pre-emption waiver, and because
they have their own plans. I think that you have to keep in mind that
labor’s larger perspective here is they don’t want the Obama presidency
to go down, because they’re concerned if that happens, forces of
reaction would set in that would make it impossible to pass employee
free choice and some other things that labor really wants. So I think
that, you know, you have to keep in mind, number one, labor is not a
monolith; number two, there were some divisions in labor on this bill
that were—that have been kind of muted.
But for myself, I’m in Congress to represent the interests of
working people, and I have felt, from the beginning, that single payer
is the only real solution. This bill, as Amy mentioned, does, you know,
have—you know, does cover 30 million. As Ralph said, it’s not going to
kick in for four years. Look, I am not going to be here to argue the
merits of this bill, but to say that there is a chance now to leap over
this process and go for more comprehensive reform, without carrying the
burden on our backs of saying that we’ve wrecked any chance for reform
within the context of the present system. We have to change the system.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to ask you both to stay with us.
We’re going to go to a break. We’re going to come back, because we’re
talking about healthcare, but we’re also talking about this anniversary
of the war. And they are related, when it comes to what is paid for and
what isn’t. Congress member Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, Ralph Nader,
longtime consumer advocate, both have run for president of the United
States.
This is Democracy Now! We’ll be back in a minute.
[break]
AMY GOODMAN: Our guests in Washington are Congress member
Dennis Kucinich, who has switched his vote to supporting the healthcare
reform bill, Ralph Nader, longtime consumer advocate, a fierce critic of
that bill.
The war—Ralph Nader, you mentioned before Afghanistan and Iraq.
We are coming up on the seventh anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. Can
you relate the costs that go into healthcare in this country, or don’t
going into healthcare, with the costs of war?
RALPH NADER: Well, just the cost of the war in
Afghanistan, which is expanding rapidly, is more cost to the taxpayer
than the supposed yearly cost of this health insurance bill that’s about
to pass. So that’s just one country. That doesn’t even count Iraq. Joe
Stiglitz, Nobel Prize-winning economist, whom you’ve had on the show,
estimates the Iraq war to cost $3 trillion.
But how about the human costs? Two countries blown apart,
millions of people dying, many millions refugees from their own
country—such as Iraq, four million refugees out of 25 million
people—more people displaced, more people sick, injured, our soldiers
dying, coming back traumatized with illnesses, family split apart. This
is madness! And the American people have got to really come together
here. Nobody is going to do it for them. Dennis Kucinich is not going to
do it for them. Nobody’s going to do it for them. They have got to
start marching. And there’s going to be a big rally on Saturday—I hope
Dennis will be there—in Washington, DC, in opposition, among other
things, to Obama’s war in Afghanistan.
You know, Eisenhower was so prescient when he warned the American
people in 1960 about the military-industrial complex. It’s devouring
over half of our operating federal budget. The Pentagon budget, which is
over half of the federal operating budget in Washington, isn’t even
auditable. The General Accounting Office of the Congress every year
declares it’s not auditable. You know what that means. That means
there’s no control on how the money is spent, and so they’re hiring
private contractors, as the New York Times reported, to engage in
homicidal activities and military activities, totally unaccountable, in
the dark shadows of the war in Afghanistan.
So the key question, Amy, is, how do we motivate the American
people to start acting on what they already believe, that these are wars
that are eating at the heart of America and damaging its status all
over the world, and that we’ve got to bring those soldiers back home,
and we’ve got to shut down these wars, because all they do is fuel the
insurgencies, as General Casey and many others have said over the years?
Our military occupation in Afghanistan is fuelling the insurgency. It’s
producing huge sectarian revenge animosities and killings, and it’s
propping up a very corrupt government that is loathed by most of the
people in Afghanistan. And all this on the back of the taxpayer, while
we don’t have any money to fix the Americans’ public works and all the
things that Dennis has talked about. How do you get the American people
angry? That’s what your show should try to—to try to inquire in.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Congressman—let me ask Congressman
Kucinich, Ralph—
RALPH NADER: How do you get them to move on what they
already perceive to be the case?
JUAN GONZALEZ: Let me ask Congressman Kucinich on the
issue of the war—again, you’ve talked about the necessity to preserve
the Obama presidency, but yet so many antiwar Americans are furious at
the continued expansion of the Afghanistan war, the fraudulent
elections, the continued corruption in Afghanistan. Your sense of the
administration’s track record on this and the ability of Congress to
rein in these wars?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: As you know, we had a vote last
week. Sixty-five members of Congress came forward and said it’s time to
get out now, that, you know, it’s a benchmark in terms of the war in
Afghanistan. This administration made a choice to accelerate the war. I
think it was the wrong choice. And as someone who’s consistently
challenged the foreign policy of this country, I can say that we have to
let the people know that the cost of this war is being borne not only
now, but in future generations. The cost of this war is being borne in
terms of the integrity of our position in the world. The cost of this
war is the deaths of so many—of countless innocent people and of the
inability of our country to play any kind of a role in creating peace.
The problem with war is it has a headlong momentum and that once
it gets started, it’s very hard to stop, which is why those of us, from
the beginning, who said, “Look, don’t go into Iraq. There’s no basis for
it. There’s no weapons of mass destruction,” we were just swept aside
at the time. Now it’s very clear that the war was a pretext, that we
were lied to. More and more people know that.
But what’s also interesting is that there’s a lull that settled
over this country. War has become ordinary. War has become like part of
our daily lives. That’s a serious problem, because it means that we’ve
accepted war. And we have to reject it. We have to reject it in all of
its manifestations, which includes, you know, the spending to keep the
war going, the support for the military contractors, the assassination
policies that are involved, the unmanned aerial vehicles that are used
to strike at people without anyone taking any real responsibility for
the results of dead civilians.
We have reshaped our country in a post-9/11 America, which is so
saturated with fear that we’ve lost the confidence of our nation to be
able to create new possibilities, like peace with other countries, like
being able to get out of Afghanistan after we cut a deal with the
Taliban that says, “Look, we’re not going to keep aggressing. We’re
going to take a new direction. We’re not—we recognize that we can’t run
this country. We have enough problems with things here at home.” War has
depleted our ability to be able to meet the needs of the people, not
only with respect to healthcare, but with respect to job creation,
education and retirement security. All these things are at risk.
AMY GOODMAN: Congress member Kucinich, did you raise this
issue—
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: There’s a point at which we have to
realize war is a disaster.
AMY GOODMAN: Did you raise this issue with President Obama
on the flight to Cleveland back to your district? And can you recount
what your conversation with President Obama was on that flight?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: The conversation I had with
President Obama was about healthcare and healthcare only. I made the
points that I’ve made many times about the importance of having a public
option, the importance of protecting the rights of states to pursue
single payer. I didn’t get any reception on that. I mean, yes, I made
those points. I did not talk to him about Afghanistan.
But also on the flight was General Jones. And I did make—I did
have a half-hour to talk to him about the war and about my concerns. And
I continue to express those on a daily basis to people in the White
House. They’re committed to this surge. I think that they’re going to
look again at the results in October and make a decision as to whether
or not they move forward into the breach.
AMY GOODMAN: Why was General Jones on the flight?
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: He’s the National Security Adviser.
He was on the flight. You know, it’s not unusual to have members of the
President’s staff and cabinet on these flights on Air Force One. And
that he was on there, I just took the opportunity to talk to him about a
range of concerns that I have. He was receptive to listening. I don’t
know that it will change his mind about anything. But I think that—you
know, he and I have had an ongoing discussion about my concerns about
our policies in Afghanistan, about the surge, about the assassination
policies, about what’s happening in Pakistan, and that’s what we talked
about.
RALPH NADER: You know, President Obama is like President
Bush in this regard: he doesn’t receive dissenting groups in the White
House. He froze out the single-payer advocates, including his longtime
friend, Dr. Quentin Young, in Chicago, Illinois. And he’s freezing out
dissenters, dissenting groups from meeting with him in the White House.
They can’t get a meeting with him. He’s surrounded by warmongers. He’s
surrounded by the military-industrial complex. But he won’t meet, for
example, Veterans for Peace. He won’t meet Iraq Veterans Against the
War. He won’t meet the student groups and the religious groups and the
business groups and others who opposed the Iraq war back in 2003. What
is he afraid of here?
You know, we’re supposed to have a new wave with the Obama
administration. Instead, we have the same old—the same old same old. And
I think the whole idea—just let me make this—the whole idea that Obama
is for things, but they’re not practical—he’s for single payer, he
really doesn’t like war, but, but, but. But he goes along, and he goes
along. We have to have the American people give the White House a
measure of political courage here, because it’s not going to come from
inside the White House. And he ought to open the way to meet with
Veterans for Peace—
JUAN GONZALEZ: Ralph—
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: If I can respond, what I’d like to
say is this—if I may respond, you know, I think that with three years
left in the Obama presidency, we have to continue to encourage him, but
we’ve got to be careful that we don’t play into those who want to
destroy his presidency and say—you know, the birthers and others who say
that, you know, he should have never been president to begin with. This
is—you know, there is a tension that exists, and I’ve—you know, I’ve
been very critical of the administration on the war, on the so-called
cap and trade, and on a whole range of other issues. But at the same
time, we have to be just very careful about how much we attack this
president, even as we disagree with him. We have to be careful about
that, because we may play into those who just want to destroy his
presidency.
And he’s—you know, like it or not, he’s the president, he’s what
we have, and I’m going to continue whatever I can do, just as one
person, to try to keep trying to influence a different direction. But,
you know, it’s not easy. He’s made his position different than, you
know, what many of us would go along with.
JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, I’d like to ask Ralph Nader—
REP. DENNIS KUCINICH: At the same time, we have to see if
is there a way to work with him.
JUAN GONZALEZ: I’d like to ask Ralph Nader about the issue
of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, why you think the antiwar movement
has not gone into the streets or taken the kind of—had the kind of
upsurge against the expansion of the war in Afghanistan, for instance,
that it did during the high times of the war in Iraq?
RALPH NADER: First of all, the 2004 election with Kerry
and Bush, the antiwar movement, most of the groups, gave Kerry a pass
and broke off their mass demonstrations. It broke the momentum. Momentum
is very important in mass demonstrations. Second, there are fewer
people in Congress that these—the antiwar people can cling to. That’s a
demoralization effect on people. And third, it costs a lot of money to
put these demonstrations on, and there aren’t many super-rich antiwar
Americans, like George Soros and others, who are putting some money to
get the buses and get the demonstrations all over the country. And
finally, the Washington Post, New York Times, they do not
give adequate coverage to antiwar demonstrations, compared to the
coverage they’ve been giving to the tea parties. Just check the column
inches in the Washington Post covering the tea parties, compared
to blocking out pro-Gaza, pro-Palestinian demonstrations, for example,
when the Israelis invaded Gaza, or the upcoming demonstrations against
the war. All of this demoralizes people. And they say, “What are we
doing this for?” So, unfortunately, the political leaders—
AMY GOODMAN: Five seconds.
RALPH NADER: —are not leading, and the President is not
leading. We cannot give this president courtesy of words, of course, but
we cannot give this president a pass. He can control the Congress-
AMY GOODMAN: We have to leave it there. Ralph Nader and
Congress member Kucinich, I want to thank you very much for being with
us. Allan Nairn will be on with us to talk about Indonesia tomorrow.
NATURAL NEWS- Today the medical mafia struck another devastating blow to the health and freedom of all Americans. With the support of an inarguably corrupt Congress that has simply abandoned the real needs of the American people, the sick-care industry has locked in a high-profit scheme of disease and monopoly-priced pharmaceuticals in a nation that can ill afford either one.
And this Pharma-funded betrayal, it turns out, was led by the Democrats. Passed on a 219-212 vote that was only accomplished thanks to closed-door, last-minute secret meetings among the last holdouts, this new legislation puts America under the stranglehold of the medical mafia while doing absolutely nothing to address real health care reform.
There is no mention in the bill, for example, of vitamin D for preventing cancer, or orthomolecular medicine for preventing degenerative disease. There’s not even a word about protecting health freedom or ending the century of oppression that has been waged against naturopathic practitioners by the AMA, FDA and FTC.
The new legislation does, however, lock in billions of dollars in monopoly profits for the pharmaceutical companies — the same companies who spent millions of dollars pushing for its passage and who depend on the continuation of sickness and disease for their future profits.
There’s only one problem with this health care reform bill: It doesn’t reform health care. It has almost nothing to do with health care at all, in fact: It’s really more of an effort to expand a broken sick-care system. When faced with the problem that our sick-care system doesn’t work, Congress somehow decided that fixing the problem merely involved expanding the failures to include everyone!