Nurses and the Presidential Election 2004

"No Response." Wow. That about says it, doesn't it?

i know that i am not voting republican anymore! just look at the mess they have created the past few years and that will be your answer!!

Not much detail in the answers. Typical political rhetoric.

I have to agree I think the answers are very vague. I also think that these are all contingent (sp)on passing the house which no candidate can guarentee that they will pass. Although I hope that Clark becomes the next Democratic candidate I do not think the president can pass anything helpfull when it comes to a specific job field.

My $.02

I don't ever recall the ANA endorsing any republican candidate. Seems to me that nursing will only endorse democrats. The question is which democrat? Please don't give me another Clinton!

I still vote my conscience (not party) and time will tell where this national election is headed.

-HBS

I read over several of these proposals, and they all seem to be pretty similar. Frankly, I think that overall, they appear to be pretty good plans. But a question occurred to me as I was reading them.

Why do we need the government to step in and fix our problems? Face the facts: Of the all healthcare professions, there are by far and away more nurses than any other provider. I don't have the statistics in front of me, but there may be more nurses than all other healthcare professionals combined. Numbers mean strength, and strength means power to make changes. We just have to wield that power. Look at some of the major points of these plans, and ask yourself "can government do a better job of fixing these problems than we can?"

-Mandatory overtime: I think we probably all agree that mandatory overtime is a horrendous policy. It puts patient safety and the health of nurses at risk. There is a nursing shortage, and hospitals are trying to compensate for that by making nurses work more and more. You know why? Because nurses are collectively allowing them to do it. There are some who are standing up and saying no, but why don't we all do that? Because there are a huge number of us who for whatever reason (fear, intimidation, or even just out of concern for patients) that aren't standing up to say no. Just about one year ago, I worked for an anesthesia group that worked the CRNA's 60 to 80 hours a week, and the docs were working even longer hours. There were five CRNA's in the group. I was the first to vote with my feet. I found another job, and quit. That group has since lost two more CRNA's as well as at least two physicians. Ultimately, in an environment where there is a short supply of nurses, the employees have the power.

-Recruitment: Why do we, as a profession, need the government to recruit more members into our profession? Are we not proud enough of who and what we are to do our own recruiting? Frankly, were I just getting ready to choose a career, I would feel very wary of any profession (other than the military) that needed government help to recruit new members. I'd wonder why nurses, a nursing organization, wasn't doing more work along those lines. And as I considered the possible reasons for needing the government to help, I'd probably decide to look elsewhere for a career.

I could go on and on, talking about pay rates, safe working conditions, etc, but I think you get the point. We, as nurses, know better what we need to improve our lives than the government does. What we don't have is one real organization that represents us. (As a CRNA, I have the AANA, which is very good, but they only represent CRNA's.) Oh, sure, the ANA could do it, but somehow, that organization is just not very good at it. They publish "position papers," but what they really want is to get the government to make the changes. The ANA is divided and fractionated, trying to make everyone happy. With divided goals, it does a poor job of addressing the fundamental concern of all nurses.

And, as some of you have pointed out, politicians of every stripe are long on words, but short on any real action.

We as nurses need to organize. We need one organization with the guts to stand up and speak for all nurses. We as nurses need to give allegiance to our profession, and join that organization. That organization needs to be able to call for a strike at a hospital, a hospital chain, or even nationally, and nurses must be willing to support that call. The sole focus of this organization must be the issues and problems that face nurses every day. They need to stay away from the minutiae that has paralyzed the ANA. It must be a labor organization. This organization needs to be the voice of all nurses in matters of labor and safety, from the nurse's aid to the Ph.D. Dean of Nursing at the university.

Most of you know me as a conservative, but this isn't about liberal versus conservative. I'm not suggesting in any way that you should vote for any specific candidate. That's up to you. What I am suggesting is that rather than rely on the government to fix our problems, we need to take ownership of those problems, and fix them ourselves. We need to fix them in a way that best meets our needs, and not in a way that best suits a politician's needs.

The organization must start somewhere. Why not here?

Sjoe says it repeatedly, and it bears repeating here: "We will get exactly as much crap as we will take."

Kevin McHugh

Kevin

To answer your question about why the government involvement in solving some of Nursings problems. The government on a Federal level is still the largest single purchaser of healthcare services. By virtue of that the weild enormous market influence. Secondly is in area of regulation both in terms of initiating new regs and enforcing existing.

Where potential candidates stand on these issues is valueble information.

Kevin,

Why do we need government to step in and address the problems in nursing?

Because we aren't doing it. I love it when people say "unite, unionize" Okay, I'll do that right after I free Tibet. We don't know how to do it.

Do you know how dangerous things were in the past without government regs and agencies?

Most government agencies and laws/regs come about because of tragedies that took many lives. Most of the time, these incidents are perpetrated by corporations/companies for financial reasons.

This is why we have the Dept of Transporataion, The FDA, The FAA, just to name a few.

I remember reading about how many people were injured and killed by "quack" medicine in the past. Many people were even blinded by cosmetics made from poisons before the FDA was created.

How many people were killed in coal mines before Dept of Labor and OSHA laws?

Should we do away with child labor laws and regulatory agencies?

How about the Federal Trade Commision? Do we really need them? Another "Black Friday" as occurred in 1929 would not happen again, right?

Should we just wait and see how bad staffing, madatory overtime and pt loads can REALLY get, how many people will die, how many nurses will lose their licenses before we let government step in?

This just goes to show you the opinion of politicians and of the general public has of nurses. It is also reflected by many hospital administrations.

Nurses(as a whole) are not taken too seriously. Therefore we have little political clout. Sure we may get a little attention by candidates from time to time, but whenever it comes to lobbying or labor relations, we get little support. We only have ourselves to blame. As a group we are dysfunctional. We number in the millions. Theoretically we could be one of the most powerful labor groups in the country, but we are not. Heck, we cannot even work together as a group in a hospital (example: attempting to facilitate an admission from the E.R. to the floor can be a trying endeavor,. It takes hours of wasted time and effort in what should be a simple matter.)

Also, when a group of nurses decides to go on strike, hospitals have little trouble in finding "scabs" to cross a picket line and work. Most are lured by $$$$$$. Agencies make even bigger $$$$ taking advantage of the situation. Wheter you agree or don't agree with the motives by the group to strike, you should at least respect {our fellow nursing brothers/sisters'} reasons to strike and stay away from the hospital.

This along with many other reasons is why we are paid scant attention. Politicans and others should be kissing are buttocks, especially during elections. We should have great pull on Capitol Hill along the likes of the NRA and Teamsters, but we act more like the local cowmilkers union........

Originally posted by harry Krishna

We should have great pull on Capitol Hill along the likes of the NRA and Teamsters, but we act more like the local cowmilkers union........

I think my local "cow milkers" union would take offense at this disparaging remark! They would argue that they have been very effective in lobbying for dairy subsidies and are by no means as ineffective as the nursing lobby!

Originally posted by kmchugh

I read over several of these proposals, and they all seem to be pretty similar. Frankly, I think that overall, they appear to be pretty good plans. But a question occurred to me as I was reading them.

Why do we need the government to step in and fix our problems? Face the facts: Of the all healthcare professions, there are by far and away more nurses than any other provider. I don't have the statistics in front of me, but there may be more nurses than all other healthcare professionals combined. Numbers mean strength, and strength means power to make changes. We just have to wield that power. Look at some of the major points of these plans, and ask yourself "can government do a better job of fixing these problems than we can?"

-Mandatory overtime: I think we probably all agree that mandatory overtime is a horrendous policy. It puts patient safety and the health of nurses at risk. There is a nursing shortage, and hospitals are trying to compensate for that by making nurses work more and more. You know why? Because nurses are collectively allowing them to do it. There are some who are standing up and saying no, but why don't we all do that? Because there are a huge number of us who for whatever reason (fear, intimidation, or even just out of concern for patients) that aren't standing up to say no. Just about one year ago, I worked for an anesthesia group that worked the CRNA's 60 to 80 hours a week, and the docs were working even longer hours. There were five CRNA's in the group. I was the first to vote with my feet. I found another job, and quit. That group has since lost two more CRNA's as well as at least two physicians. Ultimately, in an environment where there is a short supply of nurses, the employees have the power.

-Recruitment: Why do we, as a profession, need the government to recruit more members into our profession? Are we not proud enough of who and what we are to do our own recruiting? Frankly, were I just getting ready to choose a career, I would feel very wary of any profession (other than the military) that needed government help to recruit new members. I'd wonder why nurses, a nursing organization, wasn't doing more work along those lines. And as I considered the possible reasons for needing the government to help, I'd probably decide to look elsewhere for a career.

I could go on and on, talking about pay rates, safe working conditions, etc, but I think you get the point. We, as nurses, know better what we need to improve our lives than the government does. What we don't have is one real organization that represents us. (As a CRNA, I have the AANA, which is very good, but they only represent CRNA's.) Oh, sure, the ANA could do it, but somehow, that organization is just not very good at it. They publish "position papers," but what they really want is to get the government to make the changes. The ANA is divided and fractionated, trying to make everyone happy. With divided goals, it does a poor job of addressing the fundamental concern of all nurses.

And, as some of you have pointed out, politicians of every stripe are long on words, but short on any real action.

We as nurses need to organize. We need one organization with the guts to stand up and speak for all nurses. We as nurses need to give allegiance to our profession, and join that organization. That organization needs to be able to call for a strike at a hospital, a hospital chain, or even nationally, and nurses must be willing to support that call. The sole focus of this organization must be the issues and problems that face nurses every day. They need to stay away from the minutiae that has paralyzed the ANA. It must be a labor organization. This organization needs to be the voice of all nurses in matters of labor and safety, from the nurse's aid to the Ph.D. Dean of Nursing at the university.

Most of you know me as a conservative, but this isn't about liberal versus conservative. I'm not suggesting in any way that you should vote for any specific candidate. That's up to you. What I am suggesting is that rather than rely on the government to fix our problems, we need to take ownership of those problems, and fix them ourselves. We need to fix them in a way that best meets our needs, and not in a way that best suits a politician's needs.

The organization must start somewhere. Why not here?

Sjoe says it repeatedly, and it bears repeating here: "We will get exactly as much crap as we will take."

Kevin McHugh

Kevin! That is it!

Also I think too many have "voted with their feet" thus the shortage.

We need to use our frustration, sadness, and anger to inform the public.

If I leave a nursing job to work elsewhere I will stand in front os that place with leaflets or a sandwich board (both?) to tell why. HIPPA would keep it generic concerning specific patients but no way will I let it go.

If I end up working in child care my days off will be spent in front os unsafe hospitals doing what the nurses inside could do id they were united.

I know od an entire unit that gave their 2 weeks notice the same day. They demanded certain staffing saying the last day they would work if EVER staffed below what they insisted the minimum be.

Not the unit is staffed with floats and doctors refuse to admit patients there. As registry I also made myself a "do not send" to that place.

My hospital hired two of those nurses who had left. One wrote a letter to the editor of the local paper but it was not published.

Oh one more thing:

President George W. Bush ® - No response provided.

Carol Mosley Braun (D) - No response provided.

Rev. Al Sharpton - No response provided.

NO WAY WILL I VOTE FOR A CANDIDATE WHO DOES NOT EVEN HAVE A POLICY ON NURSING ISSUES.

Who do they think takes care of them when they get sick.

Not a doctor 24/7!