CR 99 Universal Health Coverage

  1. Hello to all my fellow nurse colleagues out there!

    I am a Graduate student in a large midwestern university;
    a group of students are involved in an activity to influence public health policy.


    DID YOU KNOW???
    HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 99 HAS BEEN
    PRESENTED TO THE 107TH CONGRESS?

    THIS RESOLUTION PROPOSES UNIVERSAL
    HEALTH CARE FOR ALL AMERICANS??

    MILLIONS OF AMERICA'S WORKING POOR ARE
    WITHOUT HEALTH CARE COVERAGE??

    CR99 CALLS FOR A SYSTEM OF HEALTH CARE THAT
    WOULD ELIMINATE DISPARITIES IN ACCESS TO
    QUALITY HEALTH CARE??

    CONTACT YOUR U.S. CONGRESSIONAL
    REPRESENTATIVE/SENATOR TODAY TO VOICE
    YOUR SUPPORT FOR CR99!!

    TELL FRIENDS, NEIGHBORS, CO-WORKERS,
    FELLOW-STUDENTS TO SEND A MESSAGE TO
    WASHINGTON!!

    NOW IS THE TIME FOR ACTION!!


    PSYCHRN IN WICHITA, KANSAS
    MORGHAN
    •  
  2. 29 Comments

  3. by   Mijourney
    Hi morghan. Who's proposing this? I'm assuming it hasn't made it to the floor yet if it'll make it to the floor?
  4. by   CATHYW
    I haven't heard about this, until now. I always thought that I would be in favor of a Nationalized Health Service, but since I've been getting the |BBC online, and seen what a mess the NHS is in in the UK, I am not at all sure. Do you have more informatioin on this?
  5. by   morghan
    In reply:

    This resolution has been proposed by U.S. Congressman John
    Conyers. I recommend you look at uhcan.org for more information regarding this critical issue. In Psych we see so many disenfranchised people with no health care, that can't afford to buy the medications that would keep them out of the
    hospital. Go to uhcan's web site for more info.

    Morghan
    PsychRN
  6. by   donmurray
    Cathy, one of many reasons why the NHS is in its present state, is decades of underfunding. We all expected great things of the then new Labour government, who promptly gave us more of the same. Every year, we do more and more, with less than inflation increases in funding, and the icing on the cake is the almost continuous reorganising.
    Nursing staffing levels are at an all time low, as is morale, although I think someone on another thread correctly summarised the recruitment problem as not so much a nursing shortage, as a shortage of nurses willing to work at the pay and conditions offered. Newly qualified nurses start on a salary 10% less than an equivalent teacher, and nearly 12% less than the police. 5 years on, the differences are nearer 15% and 20%.
    The UK spends less of its GNP than most European countries on health, and is falling down the chart, despite the too little, too late boost recently.
  7. by   CATHYW
    Wow, Don! Are there any additional benefits that offset the substandard salaries? Are you permitted to unionise? Do you see any remedy that can be achieved short term, as long-term solutions are being planned and implemented?
  8. by   RNed
    I don't support universal healthcare. I am not going to pay for it. Healthcare is not a "right", maybe a moral obligation, but not a "right".

    We do need changes in our healthcare system and delivery. However, universal healthcare funding is putting the cart before the horse.
  9. by   Mags
    Have to agree with Don,

    but still believe in the principal of a National Health Service!
  10. by   Mijourney
    RNed, like it or not, we nurses are seen as a right by most laypeople and even many workers in health and medicine. That was brought home under another topic. In fact, we find many posts where nurses have written about being taken for granted or just being taken.

    I think that what should be brought out again is how does or whether universal health care compensates nurses adequately? From reading donmurray's post, in the UK it doesn't. Not only that the patients are apparently suffering in that system.

    I haven't read John Conyers proposal yet, but I hope that it is not premised upon other countries' version of national health insurance. The US is unlike any other country I know of. I know that there are doctors in this country, like the group that fiestynurse mentioned in some of her posts, that are in support of government sponsored national health insurance or single payor system. Mainly, I feel because they've developed a deep seated hatred for managed care. I'm also aware of other proposals for national health insurance to be administered by private industry.
  11. by   donmurray
    Re Nhs; Unionising is encouraged. Salaries have risen annually at a little over inflation, for some years now. We have a national pay structure currently under review/ negotiation. The conditions are harder to describe, it's so different.
    Part of the pay problem was that although the independent pay review body may have recommended say, 6% rise, the government would agree the rise, but stage the award, so you get say, 3% at start of year, then the other 3% six, or nine months later. The tame tabloids scream"Aren't we good to the lovely nurses!" and the government (employer) keeps half your pay rise for most of that year!
    Dr. Beverly Malone, the new RCN union leader, seems to be making the right sort of noises as she takes up the reins, so watch this space! I think she held a government post with the Clinton administration, and the ANA before that.
  12. by   NRSKarenRN
    Don:
    Beverly was President of ANA few years ago and KNOWS how to work with govenment officials...that's why she was hired.
  13. by   fiestynurse
    Britain has a population size of 57 million, nearly three times the number of people in Texas. The infant mortality rate in the United Kingdom is 5.7 per 1,000 live births, and life expectancy at birth is 74.6 years for men and 79.7 years for women. (Better than the U.S. infant mortality and life expectancy rates!) Britain has had a National Health Service (NHS) since 1948. 6.7% of GDP goes towards health expenditures, and the 1998 per capita expense was $1,461-US. This NHS system is different than the single payer system that is being proposed by organizations, such as Physicians for a National Health Program, here in the U.S.

    The British government is a purchaser and provider of health care and retains responsibility for legislation and general policy matters. The government decides on an annual budget for the NHS, which is administered by the NHS executive, regional, and district health authorities. The NHS is funded by general taxation and national insurance contributions and accounts for 88% of health expenditures. Complementary private insurance, which involves both for-profit and not-for-profit insurers, covers 12% of the population and accounts for 4% of health expenditures.

    Physicians are paid directly by the government via salary, capitation, and fee-for-service. GP's act as gatekeepers. Private providers set their own fee-for-service rates but are not generally reimbursed by the public system. Specialists may supplement their salary by treating private patients. Hospitals are mainly semi-autonomous, self-governing public trusts that contract with groups of purchasers on a long-term basis.

    The British government this year has announced a huge funding increase for the NHS. Specifically, it will receive 6.2% more in funding every year until 2004. Current plans to improve the system over the next five years include hiring 7,500 more specialists, 2,000 GP's and 20,000 nurses; providing 7,000 more acute beds in existing hospitals and building 100 new hospitals by 2010; demanding that GPs see a patient within 48 hours of an appointment; and finally, guaranteeing that patients wait no more than three months for their first outpatient appointment with a specialist and no more than six months after that appointment for an operation.

    As most of you already know, I am for a National Health Care Program in the U.S. I believe that health care is a basic human right, like food, shelter, and education. Society as a whole benefits from a healthy and educated population. RNed states that he/she does not want to pay for Universal Health Care, when in fact it would be a much cheaper and efficient system than what we have now. The more involved I get in the National Health Care movement and the more research I do on this topic, the more convinced I become that it would be in the best interests of our country.

    "Health care is an essential safeguard of human life and dignity and there is an obligation for society to ensure that every person be able to realize this right,"(Cardinal Joseph Bernardin). "
    Last edit by fiestynurse on Oct 26, '01
  14. by   CATHYW
    Fiesty nurse, where did you get the data? It is all very interesting-as I've said, I could be in favor of a NHS. However, things such as a 6 month wait for surgery is frightening! Who do we know, that really needs surgery, waits for 6 months? What condition that warrants surgery, would not worsen in 6 months?

close