Here is the text of the resolution:

(from Amanda Fritz’s blog, Portland City Commissioner)

RESOLUTION No. Urge Congress to enact the United States National Health Care Act sponsored by Representative John Conyers. (Resolution)
WHEREAS, all people deserve equal access to quality health care; and

WHEREAS, there is a growing crisis in health care in the United States of America, manifested in rising health care costs, increased premiums, out-of-pocket spending, and decreased international business competitiveness; and

WHEREAS, approximately one third of Oregonians lacked health insurance at some time in 2007-2008; and

WHEREAS, those insured now often experience burdensome medical debt; and

WHEREAS, half of all personal bankruptcies are due to illnesses or medical bills; and

WHEREAS, the rising costs of insuring city employees can best be met not by limiting their benefits or terminating their employment, but by expanding their health care benefits under a national, publicly-funded health care program; and

WHEREAS, the complex bureaucracy arising from our fragmented, for-profit, multi-payer system of health care financing consumes approximately 30 percent of the United States health care spending while Medicare has a 3 percent overhead; and

WHEREAS, United States Representative John Conyers introduced H.R. 676, the United States National Health Care Act, in the United States House of Representatives for the 111th Congress; and

WHEREAS, this Act would provide a universal, comprehensive, single-payer system of high quality national health care;
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Portland:

1. Respectfully urges the United States Congress to enact the United States National Health Care Act sponsored by Representative John Conyers.

2. Directs the City Attorney to transmit copies of this resolution to the President of the United States and to members of the Oregon congressional delegation accompanied by letters urging them to work to adopt and implement the United States National Health Care Act (Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act) as defined in H.R. 676 to provide for comprehensive health care coverage for all United States residents.

3. Affirms that the Council of the City of Portland will use the City’s website, public meetings, news releases, and other forms of communication to encourage Portland residents to participate actively in the democratic process by informing their elected officials of their wishes and expectations regarding H.R. 676 and other matters of public concern.

Tweet This Post

Six Oregon physicians left Portland Sept. 8 in a custom-painted Winnebago on a cross-country roadshow aimed at building support for a government-sponsored health plan that would cover all Americans in a single giant risk pool.

read full story

Tweet This Post

Here is the question from the poll:

“Would you favor or oppose the government offering everyone a government-administered health insurance plan like Medicare that would compete with private health insurance plans?”

65% percent of respondents said yes.

here is a full analysis of the poll by Black Agenda Report executive editor Glen Ford.

Tweet This Post

But given how little attention single-payer is getting and given that we hear people will leave the country if single-payer is enacted, 82% tells us something.  And in Baucus’ state?  He shut Single-payer out of the Senate Finance debate in May, and isn’t even including a watered down public option in his bill.

And yet it is 82% – take it for what you will.

Here is the question from the Helena Independent Record:

“If there were a national referendum on single-payer health insurance for all, how would you vote? For, or against?”

Tweet This Post

The U.S. spent $7,290 on health care for each person in 2007, 87 percent more than Canada’s $3,895, according to the latest OECD data. The U.S. also devoted the highest percentage of gross domestic product to health care, 16 percent, OECD numbers show. Canada’s expenditure was 10.1 percent.

Canadians live two to three years longer than Americans and are as likely to survive heart attacks, childhood leukemia, and breast and cervical cancer, according to the OECD, the Paris- based coalition of 30 industrialized nations.

Deaths considered preventable through health care are less frequent in Canada than in the U.S., according to a January 2008 report in the journal Health Affairs. In the study by British researchers, Canada placed sixth among 19 countries surveyed, with 77 deaths for every 100,000 people. That compared with the last-place finish of the U.S., with 110 deaths.

Tweet This Post

Here is a segment of his speech praising Obama to Conservative leaders last week:

50 years from today, Americans will revere the name Obama.  Because like his Canadian predecessors, he chose the tough responsibilities of national political leadership over the meaningless nostrums of sterile partisanship that we see too much of in Canada and around the world today.

It’s throwing me off a bit, as I am pretty sure this is the first time I have ever come close to agreeing with Mulroney on anything, though it appears this open declaration of love for universal health care is connected some kind of clash of egos between him and current Conservative leader and Prime Minister Stephen Harper (who won’t even weigh in on this issue at all).

And he is praising Obama who I am not quite as convinced is a visionary of healthcare with his public option.  But..still!

I think this really shows how mainstream an issue this can be – in Canada,  people from highly varied political perspectives recognize the value of universal healthcare.

To see some of the video of the speech on Canuck Politics, click here

Tweet This Post

Premiums to buy insurance are up 131% over the past 10 years, which is much, much higher that the growth of wages during this period.  The average cost of a family package is more than $13,000.  This greatly increased expense for insurance leads to few people being able to afford insurance, yet lack of insurance killed 45,000 people according to a Harvard Medical School  study, a 40% higher death rate than for those who have insurance.  This is one every 13 minutes.  So, the health insurance companies make $$$ off premiums, and more people die.

Tweet This Post

Shares of health insurance corporations rallied Wednesday after the Senate Finance Committee unveiled a health-care bill Wednesday morning that requires almost all Americans to have health insurance, but does not include a public option. Shares of HealthNet advanced 3%, UnitedHealth Group  increased 2.7%, Humana Inc. added 2.6%, WellPoint gained 1.7%, and Aetna rose 1.6%. more…

Tweet This Post

Now, Obama appears likely to cave even on his weakened plan, and single-payer never even got on the national agenda. A wasted opportunity to say the least.

———

AP

President Barack Obama’s administration signaled on Sunday it is ready to abandon the idea of giving Americans the option of government-run health insurance as part of his ambitious health care proposal.

Facing mounting opposition to the overhaul, administration officials left open the chance for a compromise with Republicans that would include health insurance cooperatives. Such a concession is likely to enrage his liberal supporters but could deliver Obama a much-needed win on a top domestic priority opposed by GOP lawmakers.

Officials from both political parties reached across the aisle in an effort to find compromises on proposals they left behind when they returned to their districts for an August recess.

Obama has been pressing for the government to run a health insurance organization to help cover the nation’s almost 50 million uninsured, but Republicans remain steadfast in arguing against it.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said that government alternative to private health insurance is “not the essential element” of the administration’s health care overhaul. The White House would be open to co-ops, she said, a sign that Democrats want a compromise so they can declare a victory on the showdown.

“I think there will be a competitor to private insurers,” Sebelius said. “That’s really the essential part, is you don’t turn over the whole new marketplace to private insurance companies and trust them to do the right thing.”

Obama’s top spokesman refused to say a public option was a make-or-break choice for the administration.

“What I am saying is the bottom line for this for the president is, what we have to have is choice and competition in the insurance market,” White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said.

Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., chairman of the Senate’s budget committee, pushed the co-op model as an alternative.

“It’s not government-run and government-controlled,” he said. “It’s membership-run and membership-controlled. But it does provide a nonprofit competitor for the for-profit insurance companies, and that’s why it has appeal on both sides.”

As proposed by Conrad, the co-ops would receive federal startup money, but then would operate independently of the government. They would have to maintain the same financial reserves that private companies are required to keep to handle unexpectedly high claims.

Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., said Obama’s team is making a political calculation and embracing the co-op alternative as “a step away from the government takeover of the health care system” that the GOP has pummeled.

“I don’t know if it will do everything people want, but we ought to look at it. I think it’s a far cry from the original proposals,” he said.

Republicans say a public option would have unfair advantages that would drive private insurers out of business. Critics say co-ops would not be genuine public options for health insurance.

Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, D-Texas, said it would be difficult to pass any legislation through the Democratic-controlled Congress without the promised public plan.

“We’ll have the same number of people uninsured,” she said. “If the insurance companies wanted to insure these people now, they’d be insured.”

Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., said the Democrats’ option would force individuals from their private plans to a government-run plan, a claim that the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office supports.

“There is a way to get folks insured without having the government option,” he said.

Obama, writing an opinion piece in Sunday’s New York Times, said political maneuvers should be excluded from the debate.

“In the coming weeks, the cynics and the naysayers will continue to exploit fear and concerns for political gain,” he wrote. “But for all the scare tactics out there, what’s truly scary — truly risky — is the prospect of doing nothing.”

Congress’ proposals, however, seemed likely to strike end-of-life counseling sessions. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has called the session “death panels,” a label that has drawn rebuke from her fellow Republicans as well as Democrats.

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, declined to criticize Palin’s comments and said Obama wants to create a government-run panel to advise what types of care would be available to citizens.

“In all honesty, I don’t want a bunch of nameless, faceless bureaucrats setting health care for my aged citizens in Utah,” Hatch said.

Sebelius said the end-of-life proposal was likely to be dropped from the final bill.

“We wanted to make sure doctors were reimbursed for that very important consultation if family members chose to make it, and instead it’s been turned into this scare tactic and probably will be off the table,” she said.

Sebelius spoke on CNN’s “State of the Union” and ABC’s “This Week.” Gibbs appeared on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” Conrad and Shelby appeared on “Fox News Sunday.” Johnson and Price spoke with “State of the Union.” Hatch was interviewed on “This Week.”

Tweet This Post