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

Wednesday, July 11, 2018

PINK ARMY FORMING | How Women Won Primaries

Pink Army Rising
The following commentary is by Dana Chasin and is posted by permission:

Since President Trump’s election, hundreds of first-time female candidates have competed for political office.

A record 472 female candidates filed to run for House seats this cycle, shattering the 2012 record of 298 and more than doubling the number of women who ran in 2016.

More than three-quarters of the women who competed for House seats have run in Democratic primaries.
Women candidates are also winning at higher rates than ever before. Of primary contests between one woman, one man, and no incumbent, 65 percent have been won by the female candidate. A blue is wave anticipated in November; it may well turn out to be a pink army that leads it.
Contributions from Women Rise Sharply
Women are giving more to political campaigns. This election cycle, campaign contributions from female donors total 31 percent of House candidate fundraising, more than in any other election year and up from 27 percent in 2014. Women are not only participating by running, they are also participating by donating.

Source: Cook Political Report

Female Political Activism Up 
Political engagement and activism by women is at an all-time high. The Women’s March on Washington saw record numbers in D.C.—and across the nation—show up to make their voices heard on a issues such as women’s rights, gender equality, and paid family leave. Continuing with the #MeToo movement, we have seen the power of women’s voices in the political narrative and their engagement in the issues that matter most to them.
According to the latest Gallup poll tracking, just 35 percent of women approve of President Trump’s performance, compared with  49 percent of men. In 2016, Trump lost the female vote by an unprecedented 13 points, receiving just 41 percent to 54 percent for Hillary Clinton. Unmarried women, Latino, and millennial voters all came out to vote in the 2016 election in greater numbers than in 2012.  Given the rise in female political activism and the rise of female candidates focusing on issues that women care about, 2018 will surely be remembered as the Year of the Woman.
Progressive Women Win
Polls show that the Americans are looking for change from their political leaders-- and women are delivering. Candidates from districts as different as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's and Kara Eastman’s won their primaries against moderate incumbents, Joe Crowley and Brad Ashford, by running on more progressive policies and visions, and greater attention to neglected demographics.  While Ocasio-Cortez should cruise in her deep blue district, Eastman will face stiff competition in a purple Nebraska district that has been separated by one percentage point the last few election cycles.


Regardless of how difficult their general election fights will be, their primary victories represent the direction that this blue wave is headed – towards women and towards progressive outsiders.
Economic and Related Issues
A number of policy positions have played well for female Democrats during this primary season.
  • Health Care
Voters rank health care as the number one issue going into the November midterms, and they are looking for sweeping reform proposals from candidates, not incremental changes.  Democratic candidates, such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, are running (and winning) on bold, progressive policies such as Medicare for All. Healthcare issues resonate strongly with female voters because they make 80 percent of health decisions in the family, according to the U.S. Department of Labor.  Voters also tend to trust women more when it comes to healthcare, and given the importance that voters assign to the topic this will certainly advantage female candidates.
  • Taxes and the Economy
The recent GOP tax cuts have gone from a positive to either a neutral or negative campaign message in the eyes of voters. This negative impression by the electorate could be further exacerbated if the GOP look to attack entitlements in order to make amends for their fiscally irresponsible Tax Cuts and Jobs Act bill. Likewise, with the economy, voters are looking for bold messaging: to rewrite the rules of the game so the economy works for everyone, not just a select few. As wages stagnate while the cost of living increases, the tax cuts feel more and more like a dividend for wealthy special interests who rig the rules.
  • Campaign Finance Reform
Despite the repeated transgressions of the Trump administration, Democrats are double-digits behind Trump when it comes to “cleaning up the swamp.”  Democratic candidates are winning their primaries by linking economic and political reform. This issue is critical in the perception among voters that candidates stand for something and are not part of a political establishment that is looking to continue the status quo.  Many candidates have found that eschewing donations from big business, lobbyists, and/or super PACs resonates strongly with voters.
The Pink Army
A total of 29 female non-incumbent Democratic candidates have won primaries in districts that are considered to be competitive (not solid Dem or GOP) by Cook Political Report. The candidates in these districts are scattered around the country but are united by their prioritization of economic issues on the campaign trail and their desire for change.
More importantly, they will be a preponderant factor in enabling Democrats to take back the House in November.  The Cook Political Report has predicted that Democrats are going to win between 20-35 seats in November. To achieve this, Democrats must go with the flow of a pink army that has already seen half of all House Democratic nominations thus far go to women, more than double the previous record. 

Tuesday, October 10, 2017

HOSPITALS | Outlook Is Worrisome


Good Luck to You
I just read the following article posted by Dr. David Posnett today and I am re-posting by permission. At the end I have some brief comments.  – John Tepper Marlin, CityEconomist

Short Hospital Stocks! by D. Posnett MD  


East Hampton, N.Y., October 10, 2017– I have been waiting for this. Wall street charts show that investors are jittery about hospital stocks.  Here is why:

Some unfavorable financial trends and an air of uncertainty for healthcare’s future has led to an environment not particularly friendly for major investment… as hospitals continue to struggle with fewer inpatient admissions, lower reimbursements and potential increases in uncompensated care, investors are growing wary.
The current environment caused disappointing second quarters and lower earnings projections for major for-profit systems like HCA, Community Health Systems (CHS) and Tenet Healthcare…. The results led stock prices to tumble.
I would go further and add two more disturbing facts:
(2) Hospital Sector Slides. The Financial Times notes that US hospital operators' stock prices are sliding down  following a report that President Donald Trump will sign an executive order this week to withdraw some insurance requirements laid out under Obamacare. Tenet Healthcare, Community Health Systems, Surgery Partners, HCA Healthcare, DaVita shares tumbled lost up to 10% in stock prices.
My Comment (CityEconomist)
It's not just the stock market. If hospitals are heading into lean times, then one of the engines of job growth since 2009 will be knocked out. 

Even during the recession before that, the health care industry was growing jobs steadily. When this juggernaut goes into reverse... watch out, America.

Tuesday, March 14, 2017

TRUMP | Former Health Care Policy (1999)

Trump in 1999
On October 6, 1999, here is what Donald Trump thought about health care and reproductive rights, in an interview with NBC's Stone Phillips:
PHILLIPS: Health care?
Mr. TRUMP: [I'm] liberal on health care, we have to take care of people that are sick.
PHILLIPS: Universal health coverage?
Mr. TRUMP: I like universal, we have to take care, there's nothing else. What's the country all about if we're not going to take care of our sick?
PHILLIPS: Abortion?
Mr. TRUMP: I hate the concept of abortion. I hate anything about abortion, and yet, I'm totally for choice. I think you have no alternative.

Sunday, September 4, 2016

MED BIZ | Aetna Opt-Out

"Don't hate the players. 
Fix the game." 
The New Yorker http://bit.ly/2c9nXUb

See other MED BIZ posts:  Clinton Health Plan 2009 . 

Friday, February 5, 2016

JOBS | Retail Continues Strong in January 2016

The employment-to-population ratio has been
recovering. Source: BLS, Feb. 5, 2016.

Nonfarm payroll jobs rose by 151,000 in January, a falloff from the better months of late last year, the BLS announced this morning. Jobs continued strong in retail trade, food services and drinking places.

Despite a falloff in services–where job growth has for many years been more reliable than in manufacturing–health care continues strong as hospitals continue to grow. Credit the graying of America. Manufacturing has also shown good growth.

The bad news is concentrated in private educational services, transportation and warehousing. Mining jobs continued to decline, as the oil industry continues to suffer from the 70 percent drop in the price of oil compared with the peak in 2014.

Retail trade added 58,000 jobs in January, despite Walmart's report that it would close 269 stores worldwide, which translates to an eventual loss of 10,000 jobs.  Jobs grew by 15,000 in general merchandise stores, by 9,000 in electronics and appliance stores, by 8,000 in motor vehicle and parts dealers, and by 7,000 in furniture and home furnishing stores. Over the past 12 months, employment in retail trade has increased by 301,000, with motor vehicle and parts dealers and general merchandise stores accounting for nearly half of the gain. The death of brick-and-mortar retailers seems to have been exaggerated–in fact Amazon is planning to open its own brick-and-mortar outlets.

Other industries:
  • Food and beverage establishment jobs rose 47,000 in January, bringing the total for the past 12 months to 384,000 jobs.
  • Health care continued to add 37,000 jobs in January, with most of the increase, 24,000 jobs, being in hospitals. Health care has added 470,000 jobs over the past 12 months, two-fifths in hospitals.
  • Financial activities rose by 18,000 jobs in January, the largest growth area being a 7,000-job increase in credit intermediation and related activities.
  • Private educational services lost 39,000 jobs in January due to larger than normal seasonal layoffs. This sector has been plagued by revelations of debts and disappointments among students in delivery of value by some technical training programs promising good jobs at the end of the training.
  • Transportation and warehousing decreased by 20,000 in January, mostly reflecting the most vulnerable job sector–couriers and messengers–whose numbers dropped by 14,000 in January after growing rapidly in the last two months of 2015.
  • Professional and business services jobs rose by 9,000 after growing by 60,000 in December. The subcategory of professional and technical services continued to surge, adding 25,000 more jobs in January. Jobs in temp services rose more than the seasonal adjustment in December and fell by the same number in January.
  • Manufacturing added 29,000 jobs in January, following little employment change in 2015. Over the month, 11,000 jobs were added in food manufacturing, 7,000 in fabricated metal products, and 3,000 in furniture and related products.
  • Mining, which includes petroleum extraction, continued to decline by 7,000 jobs in January. Jobs peaked in this industry in September 2014 and have since fallen by 146,000 jobs (17 percent). More oil companies that over-invested in exploration are expected to go bankrupt.


Tuesday, March 10, 2015

CITYECONOMIST | 150K Page Views–Top Posts


Milestone for CityEconomist
In 30 days, CityEconomist has attracted 10K Page Views, a rate of 120K/year. Thank you for reading.

Top 10 Posts (150K Page Views)


How the Clinton Health Care Plan Was Killed Jan 31, 2009 + 5 comments





Which David Brooks Should We Listen To? Oct 24, 2014 + 4 comments


BBC Panorama on U.S. Health Care Jan 25, 2009 + 3 comments



Most-Viewed Posts During Last 30 Days (10K Views)








Thursday, November 20, 2014

Thursday, January 31, 2013

BILL GATES | Charlie Rose Interview, Jan. 30, 2013

Bill Gates and Books He Recommends.
Bill Gates was impressively lucid on a wide range of topics. Very worthwhile interview. I did not plan on writing up the interview, so I did not take notes. But here is my takeaway, with a few comments:

Measurement. The private sector is inherently measurement-oriented because every company has to focus on making a profit. Government and NGOs do not have the same discipline. (Comment: Politicians must get elected in a democracy, and laws must get passed, both of which require counting votes. In the administration of government, budgets must be balanced at the state and local level and they can't be in deficit forever even at the national level. An NGO, similarly, has to quantify its results to raise the money it spends - unless a couple of big donors give it all the money it needs...)

Health Care Spending. Gates sees as a major challenge for the United States the problem of containing health care costs. With an aging population and a Federal commitment to paying for health care for the elderly and disabled, health care costs can become a monster. More attention must be focused on how to redesign health care services so that services are delivered more effectively and efficiently. This should not be a political battle; it should be a technological problem, measuring the right thing.

The Gates Foundation. Bill Gates wants to do something for humanity that can be measured. He is working on eradicating polio. Next is malaria. The foundation is heavily invested in health care world-wide, also in financial services (Grameen Bank, Pro Mujer etc.). But he made the point that the annual spending of the Gates Foundation is dwarfed by what governments spend on global problems, especially European governments. Domestically, the foundation focuses on education and finding out what works in getting through to students. The Foundation will be required to spend out its assets within 20 years after the Gateses die. (Comment: The Foundation has $36 billion in assets, topped up by Warren Buffett's huge gift.)

Carbon tax. A carbon tax is essential, he believes, and the cap-and-trade proposals were just an alternative way of trying to get through Congress. Without a carbon tax, there is insufficient incentive for people to rely less on fossil fuels.

Nuclear power. He thinks the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disasters were a setback for the global environment because they have meant a loss of confidence in the current generation of nuclear reactors, which is a pity because they really are more environmentally friendly if they work, and the next generation of reactors will be much less reliant on human beings making the right decisions - they are much safer.

Fracking. Gates believes that the problems with fracking have been overstated - water, for example, can be recycled so that there does not have to be constant runoff to the water table. He is more concerned with sequestering the emissions from burning natural gas.

Microsoft's Future. He says that he, as Chairman, is very self-critical, so the fact that Microsoft missed the cell phone potential is something he is aware of. But he believes is that Microsoft's biggest competitor is Google and that other large website players are not so much into software development - Amazon, for example, or Facebook. He thinks Microsoft is well positioned for the future. (Comment: The late Steve Jobs famously said - http://www.winrumors.com/bill-gates-responds-to-steve-jobs-criticisms/ - that Gates ripped off other people's ideas and was not imaginative. Gates is less interested in trading claims, and just says he and Jobs were friendly competitors for 30 years... But Melinda Gates said in 2010 there are no Apple products in the Gates home.)

Sunday, January 25, 2009

MED BIZ | BBC Panorama on U.S.

My sister Brigid Marlin lives in the UK and a few days ago was watching a BBC program on health care in the United States. She sent me an email reporting that it was a shocking portrayal of the high cost and low coverage of U.S. medical care:
They were discussing the problems that Obama faces in meeting his promise to provide health care for poor Americans. The program showed an English medical team that set out to provide medical services to poor people overseas. They ended up spending 60 percent of their time helping poor Americans, as they are the most needy! We were shown people getting up at 4 am and driving for hundreds of miles to be early in a huge queue for a doctor's help.
The program was produced by BBC's Panorama, the world's oldest television documentary program, begun in 1953.
The Panorama team managed to get inside a briefing that a large US insurance company was giving its staff, awarding them huge bonuses for finding loopholes in the clients' policies, so they didn't have to pay up! They boasted that one employee had saved the company $7 million by giving them the basis for refusing to pay out because of a tiny flaw in the way they had filled out the form. This story was contrasted with the company's television ads, where a kindly fatherly figure assures clients that they will be safe and looked after.
The BBC describes the program as follows:
Barack Obama takes over as U.S. President with a promise to dramatically change America and make it a fairer place. He is inheriting the worst economic crisis in almost a century, and a country so unequal that 23,000 people die every year because they cannot afford basic healthcare. To close the gap between rich and poor Obama will have to take on the might of the corporate world, which wields enormous influence in Washington. Can he change the world's most powerful country, and should he?
My sister's message to me goes on:
The drug companies are just as bad, Panorama shows. They have bumped up their prices so that Americans pay twice as much for their medicines as the same companies charge to other countries. It seems that the drug companies are uncontrollable because they wine and dine the senators so no votes are cast against their policies. The program showed the drug companies supporting senators with money for electioneering and their favourite charities. They are determined not to allow a comprehensive health care system in America!
Well, I did a little research to see whether I can give you a link to the program. It was broadcast on BBC One, 8:30 pm, January 19. It's a half-hour show produced by Jeremy Vine. My sister is not the only fan of the show. It is posted as a "pick" by blogger “Up Your Ego: Love Your Inner Geek”. The blogger is trying to emulate the "brilliant" Watchification, Telegraph iPlayer Pick of the Day and the Radio Times Downloads index, and says:
My pick is the Panorama special on the USA health care system. I really enjoyed Michael Moore’s Sicko but it was a little (ok a lot) one sided. A great piece of entertainment and a good piece of journalism when preaching to the choir BUT lacking slightly in balance. The BBC tries to look at both sides of the story. Watch it HERE.
Unfortunately, when I tried it, I got a message that the link won't work in the United States. So the best we can do is try to get a PBS station to bring it over.

The program's e-mail address is: panorama@bbc.co.uk. I have written an email asking to be advised if the health care show has been or will be aired in the United States. You could do the same.