Showing posts with label Health care. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Health care. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

THANK GOD; HEALTH CARE SIGNED INTO LAW



(The following article was taken from episcopallife on line.)


President signs health bill into law



Faith-based groups stay the course

By Lynette Wilson, March 23, 2010

[Episcopal News Service] President Barack Obama signed the health-insurance overhaul bill, extending coverage to some 30 million uninsured people, into law March 23 during a ceremony in the East Room of the White House.
"After a century of trying, today after over a year of debate, today, after all the votes have been tallied, health insurance reform becomes law in America," said Obama, during the ceremony broadcast live on television and the Internet.
Diocese of Connecticut Bishop Suffragan James E. Curry, speaking to ENS from the House of Bishops meeting in Camp Allen, Texas, called the legislation "a wonderful step that continues our national walk toward accessibility." The Episcopal Church's longstanding commitment to health care reform is deeply rooted in the Baptismal Covenant, he said

To read the balance of this article go to: http://www.episcopalchurch.org/79901_121035_ENG_HTM.htm

Saturday, March 13, 2010

The “Fruits” of the Health Care Debate

The "Fruits" of the Health Care Debate

While watching the news on CNN recently, and listening to the latest report on what has become a perpetual news item, the Health Care legislation, it occurred to me that there are two simple motivations that the legislators need to focus on.

In our national mythology there is a phrase that Republican or Democrat, conservative or liberal would say that they subscribe to. That is that individuals have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The passage of the Health Care bill would go a long way in assuring the first item in that quote; for access to health care would assure more people not only life in overcoming illness but probably a better quality of life. With life one can then pursue the other two guarantees of liberty (freed from sickness) and the pursuit of happiness (note the word pursuit).

The second motivation is one that the legislators, many of whom describe themselves as Christians, would say that they subscribe to. That is the concept that Christians will be known by their fruits (Matthew 7: 20). In general, if one listens carefully to the motivations of each side of the debate, those favoring the passage of the bill will focus on the needs of the individual; especially those without insurance or those struggling to pay for insurance.

On the other side of the issue the verbiage, if not the pictures, speaks to what this will mean for the corporations. Jesus, the individual the conservative Christians at least give lip service to following, while he walked this Earth was found among and serving the least and the lost and was about bringing to account the powers of the world, the civil and religious authorities of his time. The large insurance and drug companies are two of the "powers of this world" in our time who do not want this legislation to pass.

"Thus, you will know them by their fruits." What "fruits" does an individual legislator support; the rights of and care for individuals, as exemplified by Jesus, or the perpetuation of the status quo the influence of the powers of this world, that in the time of Jesus were represented by the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Roman Empire?

Sunday, January 31, 2010

Why Do People Vote Against Their Own Best Interest?

The article that can be read in its entarity at the site address below provides a clear view of why people vote against their own best interest. The thrust of the article has to do with the current debate about national health care. Why would people vote against their own best interest? The article presents some clear, reasonable answers to that question.

"The Republicans' shock victory in the election for the US Senate seat in Massachusetts meant the Democrats lost their supermajority in the Senate. This makes it even harder for the Obama administration to get healthcare reform passed in the US.

Political scientist Dr David Runciman looks at why is there often such deep opposition to reforms that appear to be of obvious benefit to voters."

To Read the balance of this article from the BBC go to http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8474611.stm

Thursday, December 31, 2009

Health Care - What Would Jesus Think

As the House and the Senate send their health care bills to reconciliation in January the Public Option may be in danger of being dropped from the final bill. The current Public Option is weaker than the original proposal but is at least better than nothing; perhaps a starting point.

I discovered the following video clip on You Tube. Perhaps you would like to watch it and then contact your Representative and Senators and encourage them to support the Public Option portion in what ever way they are able.

To view the video go to:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZfU8GcdSKI/

Thursday, November 26, 2009

Progressive Social Reforms

From God's Politics a blog by Jim Wallis & friends from the Sojourners web site.

What Do Health-Care Reform, the 40-Hour Work Week, Unemployment Insurance, the Minimum Wage, etc., Have in Common?

by Chuck Gutenson 11-25-2009

Well, they were all brought to you be political progressives, they were all opposed by political conservatives, and they all are now viewed as fundamental presuppositions of a healthy society by virtually everyone. Okay, all but health-care reform, but trust me, if it passes, in no time at all it will be viewed so positively that we will no longer be able to remember why it took us so long to implement it. And, of course, the list actually includes many, many more initiatives—child labor laws, basic workplace safety rules, social security, Medicare, and so on.

In each case, the vast majority of political conservatives opposed them. They told us that businesses would be ruined, that the problems resulting from implementing the initiatives would be worse than if we left things as they were, that implementing them would make us non-competitive, or, more generally, that the good life as we know it would be gone if we were so foolish as to pass these pieces of legislation. One would think that after being wrong sooo many times, political conservatives would speak with a bit more humility, but alas, not so. If one took some of the speeches in opposition to health-care reform, one could substitute "minimum wage laws" or "child labor laws" in place of "health-care reform" and it would be déjà vu all over again—to quote Yogi Berra.

For the balance of the blog go to: http://blog.sojo.net/2009/11/25/what-do-health-care-reform-the-40-hour-work-week-unemployment-insurance-the-minimum-wage-etc-have-in-common/?continue





Saturday, August 1, 2009

God and Universal Health Care


This opinion piece appeared in The Forum on the op-ed page of USA Today on Monday July 27, 2009. I agree with Oliver Thomas' premise that God would support universal health care. Jesus said that the place to find him was among the poor and, as Mr. Thomas suggests, much of the New Testament deals with Jesus' compassion for the poor. Those conservative Christians (often but not always Republicans) who would support the basic idea WWJD (What Would Jesus Do) seem to object to Universal Health Care that would benefit the poor. Although a single payer option would be best; the public option is at least a step in the right direction.


So what can an individual do? The usual and obvious answer is contact your representatives in Congress. Do it, that also is a start.



Would God back universal health care?


Religious texts give us a good idea. The common theme: Don't turn your back on the needy.


By Oliver Thomas


Mixing church and state might be inexcusable, but the influence of religion on our political views is inevitable. Accordingly, the First Amendment does not prohibit laws that reflect our religious values as long as those laws have a secular purpose and effect. So it is curious that, until recently, little has been written about the moral dimension of the health care debate. The focus has largely been on how to pay for insuring 46 million uninsured people in America and whether to provide a so-called public option. At last, religious leaders are stepping forward to explain what our Scriptures and religious traditions have to teach us about the most important domestic policy issue to come before the Congress in recent years.


The answer, it turns out, is a lot. Not directly, of course. Our Scriptures were written long before talk of deductibles, pre-existing conditions and single payers. But indirectly, the Christian, Hebrew and Muslim texts have much to say about the quality, availability and affordability of health care.


(Illustration by Web Bryant, USA TODAY)


Where we are now


Let's start with the current arrangement. Unless you qualify for Medicaid or Medicare, health care in America is rationed based upon income and prior medical history. If you aren't part of a group health plan and can't afford or don't qualify for private insurance because of a pre-existing condition, you're sunk — condemned to a life of no health care or, at best, substandard health care. We've all heard the heart-wrenching stories of Americans who are forced to choose between food and medicine or who die because they could not afford surgery.


Here's where the Bible comes in.


Perhaps the truest thing I can say about the God of the Bible is that he is for the poor. Not just a little. God appears to be for the poor in a way that he is for no other. Because a disproportionately high number of the uninsured are low-income, knowledge of this simple fact is critical to our views on health care reform. And please don't take my word for it. The Hebrew Scriptures command that a certain amount of farm produce be left behind for the poor, forbid interest from being charged on loans and forgive the debts of people at seven-year intervals.


In ancient Israel's agrarian society, even the land itself was to be returned to its original owners every 49 years so that a family's underlying source of income could be protected and sustained. While some Christians conclude that the infamous cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of their militant homosexuality, I think the Bible reports otherwise. Instead, Ezekiel 16:48-49 suggests that it was because they neglected to care for the needy.


Such "care" extends to health care. The legendary Jewish scholar and physician Maimonides listed health care first on his list of services that a city should offer its residents. According to Rabbi David Saperstein (described by Newsweek as the most influential rabbi in America), the ancient Jewish commitment to provide health care to all God's children stems from the Torah's teaching that an individual human life is of infinite value. "A little lower than the angels," as the Psalmist puts it. Quoting Leviticus, Saperstein says, "We are constantly commanded not to stand idly by the blood of our neighbors."


Christians find similar teachings in the New Testament. One of Jesus' most famous parables is about health care. A Samaritan traveler happens upon a seriously wounded man lying by the side of the road. The Samaritan attends to the man, dresses his wounds and pays a substantial sum for his care and recovery. Jesus ends the story by telling his hearers to "go and do likewise." At the end of his earthly ministry, Jesus adds final instruction to those who might have lingering doubts about their responsibilities to their uninsured neighbors: "Love one another as I have loved you."


So tell me, do you suppose Jesus would make a person choose between food and medicine?


For Muslims, the Holy Quran contains multiple admonitions to attend to the needy. One of the prophet Mohammed's sayings, in particular, bears mention: "When a believer visits a sick believer at dawn, 70,000 angels keep on praying for him until dusk. If he visits him in the evening, 70,000 angels keep praying for him until morning, and he will have reaped rewards in paradise." Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf tells me that if merely "visiting" the sick provides this kind of blessing, providing actual medical care especially if the person is poor would engender even greater rewards.


What about the how?


While our various holy texts instruct us about who should receive health care (i.e. everyone), and our common religious teaching to "do unto others as we would have them do unto us" suggests that the quality of medical service should not be compromised because of age or income, our scriptures do not instruct us about how we should go about accomplishing the task.


Some faith communities, such as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, have elaborate social welfare systems that may include funds for medical costs. Others may band together to provide free clinics for the uninsured of all faiths as some doctors have done. Some members of Congress are proposing "health care cooperatives" as one means of expanding coverage, and some states have gotten ahead of the federal government and are finding ways to cover their own citizens. However we choose to do it, the moral imperative is the same: high quality, affordable health care for everyone.


The Rev. Jim Wallis, a Christian activist and founder of Sojourners magazine, has warned that there is one additional role clergy will be playing in the upcoming debate: helping us get at the truth. "Lying is not allowed here," he says. No doubt Wallis remembers the rancorous 1993-94 health care debate with its infamous Harry and Louise ads. But this time, things feel different. Doctors, hospitals, drug makers and insurance companies are at the negotiating table. Even Wal-Mart is running ads advocating employer-mandated coverage.


Nevertheless, Cigna insurance executive turned whistle-blower Wendell Potter testified recently that the insurance industry fearing competition is engaged in a campaign to scare Americans away from any sort of public plan.


In truth, says Potter, America's nearly half-century-old Medicare program has proved itself an efficient choice. Administrative costs of Medicare? Less than 5%. Of the private plans? Closer to 20%, according to Potter.


Jesus admonished his disciples to be as innocent as doves, but he also warned them to be "as wise as serpents." Let's hope Congress can be the same.


Oliver Thomas is a minister, lawyer and author of 10 Things Your Minister Wants to Tell You (But Can't Because He Needs the Job).


Posted at 12:16 AM/ET, July 27, 2009 in On religion column Permalink