Dissent magazine has a fascinating article by Marie Gottschalk on current efforts to achieve healthcare reform in the United States http://dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=1166. SEIU President Andy Stern and the business-friendly approach that failed here in California gets some well-deserved criticism:
“So far, Stern has garnered a disproportionate amount of media and popular attention. His business-friendly stance on health care reform, which stresses how the U.S. health care system is fundamentally hurting the country’s economic competitiveness, helps explain why. But his economic competitiveness argument is not convincing and could undermine efforts to forge a successful coalition or movement on behalf of affordable, high-quality care for all.”
The author argues that wooing business leaders in order to build momentum for healthcare reform is a backwards-thinking approach, and one that has failed before. For example, the labor movement tried to bring business leaders to the table in the early 1990s. The Clinton healthcare plan fell apart not only due to a lack of grassroots support, but also after multimillion-dollar attacks came from those same business leaders. The author also shows that healthcare costs are not hurting the U.S. business community’s ability to compete with overseas companies.
One example: European and Japanese firms bear higher indirect costs, because of higher corporate taxes. Those extra costs generally exceed what even the most generous American businesses spend on coverage for their employees. Another example: corporate spending on healthcare, as a percentage of after-tax corporate profits, declined steadily in the U.S. between 1986 and 2004 (except for the three years from 1998 to 2001).
Gottschalk’s bottom line: “The economic competitiveness framework obscures the fact that employers and insurers have been remarkably successful at shifting health care costs onto employees, their families, and other individuals through higher co-pays, higher deductibles, restrictions on coverage, and other measures,” and the focus needs to be placed squarely on the damaging economic consequences for individuals and households who are bearing the greatest burden of rising healthcare costs, not on employers.
The reality is that only by building a bottom-up movement will we win healthcare reform—and only after we make it clear that change is important because it’s the right thing to do for everyone. Arguing that we need reform in order to protect corporate profits is the wrong way to go. It is the right of every person in this country to have access to quality, affordable healthcare. This moral rationale for reform must maintain center stage, linked to an economic rationale focused on reducing costs for working families, and delivering higher-quality healthcare more efficiently—by providing better integrated, more appropriate services, and reducing insurance company administrative overhead, marketing costs, and profit.
My union, United Healthcare Workers-West, fights for real healthcare reform based on these principles and our personal experiences with this perverted system. We oppose phony reform, like what Arnold Schwarzenegger proposed for California last year. Badly misreading the situation here in the state, Andy Stern supported a reform package that yielded far too much ground to Schwarzenegger’s proposals. That plan proved unacceptable to the rest of the labor movement and the State Senate, and would have been rejected by voters had it gone to the ballot.