Health Care Is a Human Right?

Tuesday evening I attended a Healthcare is a Human Right forum in Montpelier. I wasn’t expecting much, really—a few heartstring pulling stories, empty rhetoric and/or fanatical support for a healthcare overhaul from attending legislators and a manipulated question and answer session. I think I must be a prophet because that’s exactly how it played out. I wanted to go because legislators from Washington County would be on the panel. I also wanted to learn a thing or two about organizing. I was happy to meet up with a few Tea Party folks and altogether the “opposition” camp amounted to 5 people.

Upon entering we came to a long table jam packed with information and paraphernalia from the Vermont Workers’ Center, the group which has made “Healthcare is a Human Right” (HHR) a slogan known in practically every household in VT and beyond. They have adapted an iconic symbol of Rosie the Riveter into a nurse who I would not want to look at the wrong way in a bar. The VWC has impeccable branding. The red shirts and signs are everywhere. This was the second HHR event I’ve attended. They are well organized and seem to have infinite funding. They even had free bottles of water and all the Ben & Jerry’s you could eat.

The turnout was lower than I had expected. The Montpelier High School auditorium holds 600 people. I’d estimate the room was about ¼ full. I’m not sure if this is considered good for this type of event but seeing as there was little to no public advertising (and I found out through the Tea Party list) I would give it a thumbs up in that area. I have a feeling the opposition turnout would have been slightly higher had the forum not been scheduled for what was GOP caucus night in most towns around the state.

A long line of tables was set up on the stage for the legislators. There was also a podium with a microphone and a desk next to it with a mike. The organizers provided interpretive services for the hard of hearing which I thought was a great touch. However, after the initial introduction I don’t recall seeing the interpreter signing.

Above the legislator table on the back curtain were 5 placards with the words “Universality”, “Equity”, “Accountability”, “Transparency” and “Participation” printed on them. All of the legislators from Washington County were invited but some did not attend (most notably Republicans). Seated at the table were Senators Bill Doyle and Ann Cummings, and Representatives Paul Poirier, Mary Hooper, Janet Ancel, Tony Klein and Topper McFaun. The meeting began at 7pm, Rep. Tess Taylor arrived at the table at 8:10.

The introduction consisted of a short welcome followed by a summary of Article 25 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. For those unfamiliar with this Article, here it is:

Article 25.

• (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
• (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

On the surface, who could argue with these noble assertions? That is until you follow the slippery slope that these folks are treading down the paths to universal provision of food, clothing and the very broad “social services”. Many of us would not consider the labor of one to be the right of another but I digress.

Following this we heard from 4 speakers. One gentleman had had a life threatening kidney problem which forced him to make the unconscionable decision between his money and his life. He went on to discuss how he had ended up negotiating with the doctors and hospital because he was uninsured. He ended up making a deal on the price of his surgery. He was even granted the option to pay as he could afford after the services were rendered. That’s something that a lot of these HHR people seem to forget—when you need services you get them, regardless of your ability to pay at the time.

The next speaker was a self-employed carpenter who has been uninsured most of his adult life. Health insurance that he could afford came along with a $10,000 deductible. And you know, I could kind of sympathize with the guy. I’ve been uninsured before, too. But I bet he wasn’t going to the doctor for a sniffle as many people with “good” insurance do, just because they have it and want to get their money’s worth. But again I digress.

What I found most shocking about his testimony was his assertion that the United States lacks creativity, innovation and ingenuity because people don’t have health insurance. Really, that came as quite a surprise to me. I had never drawn a parallel between the two before. That must explain the dip in my collage-production during the time I was uninsured. Apparently, using his logic, the fact that I haven’t created a really good collage in the last few years is directly related to my lapse in health insurance coverage.

After this revelation we heard from a woman who was diagnosed with lupus and given just a short time to live. Her testimony was very heartfelt. She’s a single mom and had to make the hard choice that so many have to make—medication or sustenance and shelter. I genuinely sympathized with this woman. I’m not cold and greedy, I think the health insurance situation in this state needs to be reformed. But I still don’t agree that the labor of a health care provider is a human right.

The fellow who came after her gave a brief, somewhat inarticulate description of what the principles on the placards above the legislators meant. I don’t fault him for not being able to move beyond the talking points, though. There is an overwhelming lack of detail in these arguments.

The legislators were then asked if they felt that health care is a human right. Bill Doyle was emphatic in answering in the affirmative and also stated that health care must be transparent. I somehow missed what Ann Cummings, Mary Hooper and Tony Klein had to say about this specifically. Poirier said that it is a "basic right" and that people ought to have equal opportunity and access. He also let us know that H.100, the House version of the single-payer healthcare bill is “going nowhere.” Mary Hooper stated that health insurance needs to be discussed more and that it should not be tied to employment.

Janet Ancel said that health care is a "basic human right" and recited talking points that left me a little glazed over. So it was a good thing Tony Klein was next. He was a fireball, ranting about how the problem is money and that “we” need to get people out of the way who are making the money. As you can imagine this got the crowd going and he got the biggest applause of the night on this one. Later in the conversation he assured the crowd that he would threaten Shap Smith with revolution if this issue didn’t get a fair shake in the legislature. And they call US radicals!

Topper McFaun, who has often bucked his party over health care reform stated that health care is "not a right but a public good" which should be handled similarly to the Police or Fire Departments. He said health care should be a non-profit industry and the government should ensure that everyone is covered. But his party affiliation did come through to some extent when he asserted that Vermont ought to have waivers which would allow the state to do what we want to do rather than what Washington wants.

Following this a Q & A session commenced. Written questions were to be submitted and then a moderator posed the questions to a designated legislator or the legislator of her choice. One question was what the roadblocks are to meaningful reform. An overarching theme (or just the natural result of having politicians speak one after the other) was the lack of political will. (This was when Tony Klein threatened revolution.) Bill Doyle kindly let the crowd know that they should be targeting the Health and Welfare and Government Operations Committees. One of the gals that I sat with had submitted a question asking the panel how they expected for these VT bills (H. 100 and S. 88) to work when universal coverage was passed in Massachusetts and is failing. The Q & A was conveniently wrapped up right after her question (the last, I believe) was submitted and disregarded .

We did, however, get a chance to speak with the legislators after the event—which was respectful and (mostly) intelligent and overall was much more satisfying than the forum itself. For the most part the legislators were approachable. McFaun and Poirier seemed to be the only 2 that really had their heads wrapped around the issue and were more than willing to engage now and in the future. Others, notably Mary Hooper, seemed to have a much looser grasp on the big picture and was caught contradicting herself a few times.

After all was said and done I left impressed by the organization of the event. The tone was very civil though that could be due to the fact that the “opposition” was very much in the minority. There are more of these going on around the state. I doubt the events will be any different wherever they are but I would encourage you to attend, if for nothing else than to observe the organization and talk to your legislators after the forum.

However there were an awful lot of unanswered questions—how would this undertaking be financed (McFaun offered up a sales tax, otherwise the only mention was on the flyer in a summary of the bills: “system of broad-based taxes”)? Would the “principle” of participation force compliance? The bills want every resident of Vermont to be covered. Would someone who moved to the state uninsured instantly be covered? Findings which support the creation of this bill mention the lack of sustainability in the current health care model. How would these bills fix that? How exactly would health care quality improve with a universal system?

This makes a lot more sense to me: