Donna Smith is one of the "stars" of SiCKO whose
family became medically bankrupt even though both she and her
husband both always carried health insurance. Then he had
three heart attacks and she had cancer...and the insurance companies
bailed out.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Since 2003, House Resolution 676, Medicare for All, has
been open for co-sponsorship and debate.
The universal, single-payer health care measure has yet to be
debated or even fully considered by Congress, but its chief architect
and sponsor remains undaunted and steadfastly committee to seeing
HR676 move forward and become the law of our land.
A long and difficult fight is not a deterrent for
Rep. and House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, Jr., D-Mich.
At the age of 78 and with 43 years of Congressional experience,
African American Congressman and national leader, Conyers walked
into the House Judiciary hearing chambers with confidence, grace
and pride.
Those of us waiting to offer testimony about medical
debt and bankruptcy and the financial trauma felt by families
facing medical crisis throughout the nation were greeted warmly
and though the press did not find their way to the hearing en
masse, the gallery was packed with people interested in the topic.
I’m not going to press-bash here, as usually, if
the topic and the event have been presented in the right way,
press folks will come. In my old role as a daily newspaper
editor, my assessment of what warranted a reporter and/or photographer’s
time and energy was based on many factors, including how the topic
might interest readers and who would be presenting or performing
at the touted event. If a passionate promoter of an event
or cause called me – as an editor – and made a cogent case for
coverage, I usually sent someone. So, somehow, this event’s promotion
missed the mark for producers and editors.
So, it’s my turn, as one of those testifying, to
make the case now that the press missed one great opportunity
for prime time, front-page worthy news.
In the case of Rep. Conyers’ hearing on Tuesday,
July 17, those testifying certainly were worthy of attention and
the topic was one of direct impact to millions: medical
bills and medical crisis are driving many, many Americans to financial
ruin and bankruptcy. Many mainstream media giants are giving
attention to health care issues in acknowledgement that this is
the single domestic issue most worrying a majority of Americans.
While the immigration battle is also an important domestic concern,
life and death issues are being decided daily on the health care
front, Americans are seeing premiums rise and coverage lag and
the overall economy is absorbing huge costs due to health care.
So in sauntered these dapper, elderly gentlemen,
Rep. Conyers, to lead an afternoon’s proceedings of fire and passion,
statistical commentary and academic debate on the nation’s number
one domestic issue. And the press stayed away – perhaps
covering the setting up of cots for the all-nighter the Senate
would later pull to discuss the Iraq war.
Trust me, the sexier story and the Congressional
activity with the most potential for long-term impact happened
in Rayburn 2141, where the House Judiciary sub-committee on commercial
and administrative law convened its proceedings.
These were the first official proceedings to include
direct testimony from Americans to Congress about how HR676 might
improve the nation’s situation, and Conyers reminded all present
that the proceedings were “historic” in that regard.
The entire video of the hearing is available on the
House Judiciary website for those who wish to watch it, but I
hope to give you a feel from my perspective as a witness and some
ideas for follow-up to re-engage the press and to reach more people
who want to tell their stories to Congress. In that Congressional
hearing room, I was wrapped in a robe of support and decency,
first by Rep. Conyers warm welcome and then by some of the others
who testified and audience members that included nurses (many
representing the California Nurses Association), health care reform
(Marilyn Clement, national coordinator for HealthCare-Now) and
anti-war activists (including the Code Pink gang), and others
I have met along my path to the hearing.
The sub-committee chairwoman, Linda Sanchez, D-Calif.,
opened the hearing with kind introductions of each of us and a
few of the ground rules.
I was asked to testify because my health care costs
during my family’s health care crisis drove me to financial ruin
and eventually to bankruptcy.
My testimony is also online
at the House Judiciary website, so feel free to read or watch
the entire testimony or parts thereof.
But one of the most important points to note about
my financial demise was and is that my family never went without
health insurance coverage. Many Americans who now relax thinking
that their health insurance coverage, perhaps through their employers
as ours was, will protect them from our fate are wrong and could
end up where we did.
There was loud applause when I finished. I clutched
one of my late father’s hankies to my mouth to keep from letting
out chokes of agony that have been held in for 20 years and now
were being released through sharing the pain with those who could
have stopped our suffering. I looked back at the nurses, I looked
back at my husband and daughter, and I looked at Mr. Conyers.
Though I had admonished each and every one of them for their lack
of progress on health care reform, he looked back at me with approval
and with love.
Next up were the folks who do not concur that medical
debt is a big cause for crisis or bankruptcy in America.
They did not call me a liar but they did lean toward seeing my
family’s financial demise as one of those few, “unfortunate” cases
that will happen in any system. Clifford White, director of the
Executive Offices of the U.S. Trustees, said there just were not
enough official statistics to draw a correlation between medical
crisis and bankruptcy, and Todd Zywicki of George Mason University
School of Law said that the academic study that made a connection
between medical debt and bankruptcy was flawed. They were
both fairly dry, but also purposeful in their remarks. They
both wanted nothing to do with promoting any sort of movement
toward HR676 based on bankruptcy data.
Seated directly to my left was a self-assured but
gentle professor named Dr. Elizabeth Warren from Harvard Law School
who is an expert on medical debt, financial crisis and bankruptcy.
She cried softly when I finished my testimony, told me that my
testimony was the best she’d heard and then quickly dabbed her
tears and offered her own intelligent and powerful testimony about
what studies of families like mine shows: medical debt is
driving many people over the financial edge.
Next up was Mark Rukavina of the Access Project in
Boston where individuals and families often seek help when crushing
medical debt threatens their credit, their ability to meet basic
living expenses and continue paying for medical needs. He was
a kind spirit but also offered testimony filled with information
about average American families struggling with financial concerns
while also battling illness. His words were both comforting
as affirmation of my situation not being so very different from
lots of other Americans and disconcerting for the same reasons.
A strong and purposeful man dressed unassumingly
in relaxed clothing and looking very much like a doctor I would
like to see was up next. Dr. David Himmelstein of Harvard, also
participated in the study about medical bills and bankruptcy,
but he also offered the insights of a man directly involved in
patient care and who has seen his share of tragedy related to
the current for-profit health care system in the U.S. He
even held up a hospital gown to illustrate what most insurance
plans offer (a large gap) in terms of real coverage for most Americans
who hold them.
After each of us testified individually, it was time
for questions from the sub-committee members. Rep. Chris
Cannon, R-Utah, asked several good questions, but seemed pretty
clear in his stance not to support an overhaul of the health care
system such as is proposed in HR676. He did not state that
directly, but he did object to my assertion that Congress has
failed to act on health care reform. He told me it’s a complex
issue, as if I didn’t already know that.
During the course of questioning, Dr. Himmelstein
shared that his father had been part of the team that earned a
Nobel Prize in Medicine for their work on cardiac catheterization
techniques. (That prize was awarded in 1956, and Dr. Aaron
Himmelstein was one of the researchers associated with the prize-winning
studies.) How wonderful, I thought. I am testifying
on a panel with a man whose dad helped develop one of the procedures
that has saved my husband’s life. And that research was
done using government research funds – not private dollars.
Again, research will not be halted under an HR676 plan.
The questioning went on for some time as committee
members came in and out and had to go back to the House floor
for votes. Rep. Trent Franks, R-Arizona, stopped by to make sure
everyone knew he does not support any universal health care plan
like HR676. Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, wanted to hear is the
witnesses think the U.S. has the best health care in the world.
He got answers with mixed opinions.
Representatives Hank Johnson, D-Georgia, William
Delahunt, D-Mass., and Zoe Lofgen, D-Calif., were also at the
hearing along with a few other Congressional members who stopped
by for portions of the testimony and follow-up.
All-in-all, it was, as Chairman Conyers promised,
a historic hearing. It was a hearing during which one American
got the chance to tell her truth and her story so that they might
more fully consider the plight of their constituents. They
heard from brilliant minds and care providers committed to changing
a system that is nothing like that which the Congressional members
enjoy. And all the while, the calm, confident Congressmen Conyers
from Michigan watched confidently and compassionately. He’s been
around long enough and sees so much that he could easily let the
rest of his career play out calmly and without fireworks.
But that wouldn’t be what John Conyers is all about. And
this is a fight he intends to win.
Write your Member of Congress. Ask him/her
to become a co-sponsor of H.R. 676:
Congressional
Co-Sponsors
How
to Write to Them
Click
here to contact Ms. Smith and Healthcare-NOW.
Click
here to read any of the articles in this special BC series on Single-Payer Healthcare. |