CellBlocks and Border Stops

The Institute for Pragmatic Practice, Union Theological Seminary and the Alliance for a Just Society are hosting our fifth symposium,

Cell Blocks & Border Stops. Hundreds of organizers, academics, policy leaders, journalists, theologians and grassroots activists will convene and examine the intersection of immigration control and mass incarceration, and to consider the future of activism and organizing in these areas.

Today, more than seven million people are under control of the criminal justice system (prison, probation, parole or detention) exceeding the combined populations of Brooklyn, Queens, Manhattan, and Staten Island.

Eleven million immigrants-roughly the population of Ohio-are out of compliance with federal immigration law, and at constant risk for harassment, detention, and deportation.

Counting friends, families, colleagues, and neighbors, tens of millions of people today are directly affected by the sprawling immigrant control and criminal justice systems. Poor Black and Brown people have been born this burden most heavily, driven by long-standing beliefs in racial inferiority and white supremacy.

REGISTER HERE– http://bit.ly/clblocks

But these systems leave few untouched.

Join us and noted scholars and activists Cornel West and Pramila Jayapal among many other noted speakers to end the dehumanization of millions of mothers, fathers, sons and daughters by law enforcement and the criminal justice system.

[Click here for a full event Agenda.]

REGISTER here– http://bit.ly/clblocks

Women with Cancer: Prisoners’ rights versus the Profit of Corporations

sherrie
Sherrie Chapman
Rahul Gupta and Danisha Christian
Contributed to this Series

Sherrie Chapman found a lump in her breast. A prisoner in a California Corrections facility, Sherrie persisted in demanding an examination by prison medical personnel. Her pleas were not answered until 9 years later, when lumps were visibly protruding from her breast.  Even after receiving a mammogram that revealed immediate follow-up tests were needed, medical personnel denied Sherrie personnel any sort of additional testing including a biopsy, ultrasound or fine needle aspiration.

She eventually underwent two mastectomies.  Subsequently, staff ignored her chemotherapy appointments and confiscated her medication. She filed a lawsuit against the prison, received a settlement of $350,000, but sadly, at the age of 42, Sherrie died in prison from the cancer she fought so tirelessly to beat.

Her death was one of many, among other violations against women and men, which forced the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to be under federal court supervision. “In California, inmates’ health care has been under federal court supervision for the past six years after a judge found that the state failed to provide inmates with adequate medical treatment.Continue reading “Women with Cancer: Prisoners’ rights versus the Profit of Corporations”

FHFA, Fannie and Freddie Stage A Last Ditch Effort to Squash Homeowners

The Federal Housing and Finance Authority (FHFA) is taking dramatic actions against homeowners, and cities working to fix the housing crisis.  Just, this morning, Mark Harris, a Desert Storm veteran in Atlanta, who was highlighted in the Alliance’s report Wasted Wealth: How the Wall Street Crash Continues to Stall Economic Recovery and Deepen Racial Inequity in Americawas forcibly evicted from his home at gunpoint this morning.  (Read Mark’s story here)

Continue reading “FHFA, Fannie and Freddie Stage A Last Ditch Effort to Squash Homeowners”

Inadequate Healthcare in Prisons: A Death Penalty Conviction for Profit (3-Part Examination)

Danisha Christian and Rahul Gupta contributed to this series

“In the last ten years alone, there have been instances of medical neglect, sexual abuse, and preventable suicide in private facilities [throughout the state], said Bob Libal, Director of Grassroots Leadership. Libal and others are part of the Texas Civil Rights Project and Prison Legal News lawsuit against Corrections Corporation of America. CCA is one of the top two private prison companies in the country.

Private prisons throughout the country have faced charges from family members and advocates, alleging the wrongful death of inmates whose medical conditions were not only treatable, but routine and preventable. While many of the cases included in this article point to the state of Texas—that state is not an outlier, but part of the norm.Continue reading “Inadequate Healthcare in Prisons: A Death Penalty Conviction for Profit (3-Part Examination)”

The Affordable Care Act and Women: A Nation Cycling Between Celebration and Obstruction

What Women Won with the ACA: What the Nation Should Celebrate

What the nation has now, under Obamacare, is coverage for the many costs of being a woman—medically speaking:

  • Insurance companies must now charge the same price to cover men and women.
  • No pre-existing conditions clauses will be allowed.
  • Maternity care is covered; upending an insurance market where only 12 percent of the private plans actually covered maternity care before 2013.
  • There are no more co-payments on birth control.
  • Mental health screenings are now covered. For women over the age of 40, mammograms are now covered every two years.
  • Increasing funding and support to community health centers
  • Finally, counseling and services for survivors of domestic violence are now covered.affordable-care-act

Previously, state-by-state coverage allowed employer-based coverage to decide whether premiums would be higher, whether preventive services or even family planning services would be covered by an insurance plan. For women on Medicaid, prenatal and maternity services were covered if a doctor was willing to accept Medicaid.

In theory, the ACA would fully do away with those disparities. The Medicaid option would become normalized and strengthened. Doctors could not walk away from providing medical services just because they didn’t want to accept Medicaid reimbursements. In practice this will only occur if insurance plans receive federal dollars or participate in health exchanges.

As of September 2010, pre-existing conditions were no longer allowed to bar a person from receiving health insurance. Despite the law, insurance companies, bided their time as the court case filtered its way up to the Supreme Court. And finally, following news coverage in 2010 of breast cancer survivors being denied coverage and being subjected to lifetime limits in coverage forcing insurance companies to quickly their practices.

It didn’t hurt to have the Supreme Court uphold those provisions in the law.

Furthermore, in America maternity care has become one procedural charge after another, often leading a new mother to pay upwards of $10,000 for a conventional delivery, $15,000 for a C-section. Ensuring that birth doesn’t bankrupt a new mother was a major imperative in crafting healthcare reform. (NYTimes)

“Only in the United States is pregnancy generally billed item by item, a practice that has spiraled in the past decade, doctors say. No item is too small. Charges that 20 years ago were lumped together and covered under the general hospital fee are now broken out, leading to more bills and inflated costs. There are separate fees for the delivery room, the birthing tub and each night in a semiprivate hospital room, typically thousands of dollars. Even removing the placenta can be coded as a separate charge. (NYTimes)

In states like Louisiana 70 percent of the births are paid for through Medicaid: in Texas, 56 percent. Neither state, among the 25 states refusing the program, will take responsibility by participating in Medicaid expansion—leaving the onus for covering uninsured women to the federal government. (nearly a fourth of all women ages 0-64 in both states are currently uninsured.)

Then there’s birth control. While it may not have been doing away with the Hyde Amendment, the ACA did give women more control over their reproductive choices at significant levels. The law did away with co-pays on contraceptives. It made family planning a requirement of every insurance plan on the market, even employer-based coverage has to include this provision.

But as we have seen with the refusal of states to participate in expanded Medicaid programs, private companies that this provision is a violation of their First Amendment Rights. Auto parts manufacturers, religious social service agencies, hospitals and others are fighting this provision; some on the basis of religious beliefs; others on the belief that employers should be able to make reproductive choices for their employees.

And so the noise over who controls women’s bodies continues, but the contraceptives still come without a co-pay.

What is more enlightened in the ACA is the emphasis on community health clinics. 40 percent of community health centers, even in geographic areas where the number of Limited English Speakers are few have, on average, 30 percent of their clientele needing bi-lingual services. What that means is longer visit times and the need for culturally competent care to be provided throughout the community health networks. And most of these clinics have raised the bar on medical services, often moving populations not used to preventive medical practice into longer-term, less expensive care.

The opportunity for cultural competence in medicine to become more and more the practice in the national funding regime warrants a celebration all on its own.

 

The Kerfuffle Causing Obstructionists

Americans waited with trepidation as the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the Affordable Care Act last year. Opponents of the law were banking their first salvo against health reform on a strike down from the court. One graphic told the story that millions of proponents saw to be true—( Image to the right)that the ACA would in fact transform healthcare for millions of women seemingly overnight; in fact, all women receiving preventive care, maternity care, family planning and preexisting conditions.177173_10151009492522103_397269126_o

“The Affordable Care Act helps stop health problems before they start. These historic guidelines are based on science and existing literature and will help ensure women get the preventive health benefits they need,” said HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius.(Gothamist)

In many ways the ACA changed the focus of healthcare from treatment to prevention.

Yet, with conservatives attempting to dismantle the comprehensive nature of these historic changes, the nation, it would seem, needs a constant reminder of how serious the health costs for women have become, and why it is more important than ever to remain committed to health reform. More importantly, remaining focused on reducing health disparities in our health systems that have defined for our country whose health is or is not valued.

The real fight it turns out wasn’t the lawsuit against the ACA; it would be the piecemeal policy-effect of a conservative House of Representatives, the abject reluctance of conservative governors and state legislatures, and a seeming unwillingness of ACA framers to stand by their policy victory. The Court ruling that states were not required to participate in the federal Medicaid expansion was a bigger blow to the legislation than many people realized.

Without a public option, Medicaid expansion would represent the only incentive for insurance companies to enter the affordable coverage markets (exchanges). The state of women’s heath, while certainly on firmer ground in terms of receiving coverage, will be better than it has ever been — but only if coverage options exist.

It is the uninsured population that the Affordable Care Act was intending to find coverage after all and while the fight to keep the law intact will certainly continue, Americans need to reflect on the opportunities created by the legislation.

The legislation passed both houses and was signed into law by the President; the Supreme Court only struck down one of the provisions. Even with that setback some of the nation’s most conservative governors agreed to expand Medicaid coverage to their uninsured residents. What is disheartening is the Obama Administration’s repeated concessions on implementing the law.  For example, the announcement that there would be a delay in implementing provisions to require employers to offer health plans to their employees will have huge ramifications for uninsured Americans. We still have 25 states that are either refusing to provide expanded Medicaid coverage for their uninsured populations or leaning against it — some as mentioned above won’t even take responsibility to run their own health exchanges.

The out-and-out rejection on political and ideological lines isn’t without costs. Politically, Americans can quickly turn their disenchantment on the legislation itself. Should the reforms not succeed for everyone, the chances are that the malaise will spread. The only people caught in the fray are the same ones the law was intended to support: the uninsured, 20% of whom are women ages 19-64.

We cannot remind ourselves often enough that the Affordable Care Act did more to even the gender playing field than any other piece of healthcare legislation. Unfortunately, the nation cannot measure those changes; yet.

What we can anticipate is a renewed fight for the right to health care.

The Alliance will continue to move forward to expand Medicaid in as many states as possible, we will continue to identify and remove racial and gender disparities in healthcare provision and we will continue pushing policies that innovate and strengthen coverage for all Americans.

 

From Grape Boycott to Great Buy-cott: Colorado Groups Bring New Spin to Old Idea in Campaign for Immigration Reform

The grape boycotts organized by the United Farm Workers in the late 1960s were part of a groundbreaking strategy to engage consumers in the fight for fair treatment for immigrant farmworkers. Fast forward to 2013, and groups in Colorado campaigning for economy-boosting buy-cott.purpleimmigration reform with a path to citizenship are putting a new spin on a tried and true idea. Instead of a boycott, they’re organizing a “buy-cott” to push immigration reform forward.

The website for the Colorado Statewide Buy-cott explains the basic idea driving the effort: “Vote with your wallet and shop at local businesses that support comprehensive immigration reform with a path to citizenship!”

And that’s exactly what residents of Denver, Aurora, Pueblo, Greeley, Longmont, Ft. Morgan, Grand Junction, Durango, Glendwood Springs, Carbondale, Aspen and other cities and towns across Colorado are doing from August 4-10: they’re putting their spending money to work in local businesses whose owners have declared their support for immigration reform with a path to citizenship.

The statewide buy-cott is a joint effort of a range of Colorado-based groups, including the Colorado Main Street Alliance, Colorado Progressive Coalition (CPC), Rights for All People (RAP), Colorado National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), Bend the Arc, and Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition (CIRC).

The participating organizations announced the buy-cott with a series of local press events around the state on July 29. The idea has clearly caught on: nearly 400 local businesses across the state have signed on to the effort and put up a poster in their business windows declaring their support for immigration reform with a path to citizenship.

The buy-cott has generated lots of local press coverage, too, including in major papers like the Denver Post and in smaller local papers and media outlets across the state.

 

The Great Big PhRMA Medicare Heist

Part 1: Rigging the System is Profitable

 

While millions of Americans struggle to pay for their prescription medication, big pharmaceutical companies reap $600 billion in annual profits.  $116 million is spent on direct lobbying, and with a 77,500% return, the investment certainly pays off.  Profits have been bolstered by pharmaceutical companies’ myriad of policy wins.  A well-funded barrage from lobbyists has created patent protections, limiting competition from lower-cost drug options, and, not surprisingly, price protections built into federal policies.  By comparison, when you look at the return of individual investors, multinationals, and the oil industry, we see a stark contrast:

 

The Amazing ROI of Corporate Lobbying
by JLMC.
Explore more infographics like this one on the web’s largest information design community – Visually.

 

 

Senior citizens–without blue chip stocks, without millions in expendable liquidity for political campaign contributions–average a meager salary of $22,000. The influence of money has certainly trumped the voices of the citizenry in the halls of Congress. Just look at the recent collapse of a federal gun violence bill and the influence of the gun owner lobby over the cries of the general public.

An income of $22,000 a year is hardly a fighting chance against the lobbying power of Big Pharma.  Many seniors struggle to pay for food, rent, and heat, let alone afford the sticker price on their medicines.  Drug companies, meanwhile, can spend billions in campaign contributions, PR, and advertising to ensure that their voices are heard over those of ordinary Americans.

And it certainly has been. The industry owns the story being told in Washington DC and the mainstream media.  (We tell a different version at hookedonpharma.com)

The tale that big drug companies have successfully spun is one of despair, hardship, and weak patent laws that no longer serve to protect the financial gains of private enterprise.  It runs like this: pharmaceutical companies are American institutions.  They produce life-saving drugs.  This innovation takes a lot of time and costs a lot of money.  Prices are set where they are for a reason, and people who use these drugs should pay for them.  Generic manufacturers are already able to take away name-brand profits when patents run out.  If you take away the “free market” structure of programs like Medicare Part D, pharmaceutical companies will collapse.  It is in the nation’s best interest to leave price controls in place to preserve a “life-saving” American institution.

The story is horribly fatalistic, and geared to churn the better nature in all of us.  And when told by pharmaceutical industry lobbyists who outnumber members of Congress 2:1, the narrative has taken parable status in recent years.  By targeting hundreds of millions of dollars on key members and committees, pharmaceutical companies have gotten their way in the majority of almost 1500 bills in the past eight years.

Medicare Part D is no exception.

Congress passed Medicare Part D, a prescription drug “benefit” program for seniors, in 2003.  This may initially sound like a blessing for seniors, but, among other pitfalls, the bill prevented Congress from negotiating drug prices under Medicare.  Instead of ensuring that Medicare Insetparticipants can afford prescription medication, the legislation made certain that pharmaceutical companies could maximize profits.  Immediately following the passage of the legislation that saw $116 million in lobbyist strong-arming, the same companies increased prescription prices and saw profits skyrocket.  America’s seniors are footing that bill in part through the Medicare Part D “doughnut hole,” a period when Medicare stops paying for prescriptions and the individual must pick up the “market-rate price” for their medicines.

The so-called free-market drumbeaters would have the country believe that any negotiation amounts to government intervention in the market. What they are saying is that they don’t want American citizens and taxpayers to be able to negotiate a better contract with the pharmaceutical industry.

They have created a Free Market Red Herring in the process.

 

 

 

 

 

Part 2: The Free Market Red Herring

MedicarePartDprofits

When in doubt the opposition cries free market foul play. Part D was engineered and pushed through by companies, not American taxpayers. The clause against allowing negotiated prices was the one piece that held higher-than-market prices in place, thereby guaranteeing a direct flow of taxpayer dollars into the profit columns of the industry.

What business would accept contracts term like these? “I am offering you a horrible deal, ensuring you lose on every transaction. You’ll take it and there’s nothing you can do about it.”

None.

So now what?

Screaming “monopoly” doesn’t work here: patent holders are conveniently protected against anti-trust proceedings.  And technically, there are a lot of pharmaceutical and biotech companies throughout the country so consolidation can’t be used as a factor either.  But when competitors collude to rig a piece of legislation so that there is no recourse or correction, the nation has a problem.  Or so they would have the nation believe.

The fact is, there are commonsense solutions Congress can enact right now, and ones that will save benefits for seniors, cut costs for taxpayers, and do little to hurt the profits of Big Pharma, despite their rhetoric.

Under the Medicare Drug Savings Act introduced by Senator Rockefeller of West Virginia, Medicare could save $140 billion over 10 years. Some analysts estimate that the nation would recover between 2% and 7% of the subsidized profits if Congress required drug-pricing negotiations in Medicare.

Pharmaceutical profits jumped nearly overnight after Medicare Part D was enacted in 2006.  And since 2005, big drug companies have seen an almost 50% increase in profits.  Big Pharma has successfully scared the public into believing their profits are necessary for the common good.  Yet, while profits continue to skyrocket, and drug prices have significantly outpaced inflation, Big Pharma drug innovation is on the decline.  In fact, studies indicate that taxpayers, not pharmaceutical companies, are funding most of the research leading to major medical breakthroughs.  Sounds like Americans can afford to miss out on the same allergy medicine in a different color and another t.v. commercial.  But apparently $552 billion in remaining profits and a 50% tax write off for research and development expenses are just not enough to motivate someone to help sick people.

Instead of being concerned with Big Pharma profit margins, Congress needs to ensure that seniors receiving Medicare get the best quality and most affordable healthcare they can receive. Medicare Part D is not a comprehensive solution, but is certainly a bad policy and one that was enacted under the collective boot of 1,100 Big Pharma lobbyists, constructed to pad the pockets of the drug industry. It’s time to make a change.  Congress can and should make Medicare drug coverage work for people, not Pharma.

 

 

Part 3: Setting People-First Policy Priorities

Bad Prescription

Admittedly, funding healthcare requires prioritizing.  But the priorities are simple.  Congress can prioritize the senior, who needs prescription medication to survive.  Congress can at the same time prioritize taxpayers, saving them billions.  Or, Congress can prioritize the big pharmaceutical companies:  companies that spend more paying lawsuit settlements and penalties than they stand to lose in profits if Congress allowed Medicare to negotiate drug prices.

This system of negotiations is not just an abstract concept with theoretical implications.  Its success has been shown in numerous organizations and other countries.  For example, the Veteran’s Administration (which negotiates prices with pharmaceuticals) is able to obtain the top 10 drugs covered by the plan at a price 48% lower (on average) than Medicare.  Other wealthy nations that negotiate pharmaceutical prices pay 150% to 300% less than Medicare.

It seems clear that Congress, by refusing to save seniors and the average American taxpayer money, worries more about profits than the people it was elected to represent.

The Alliance for a Just Society affiliates met in Washington, D.C. to address their Congressional leaders in the Senate and drive home the need for senior-first policies and to prioritize freeing Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices.  To bolster the voices of these delegates representing 20 states, the Alliance delivered a national petition, signed by 350 organizations, dozens of legislators, and nearly 8,000 Americans, to the Senate.  The simple demand: allow Medicare to negotiate prescription drug prices. Unfortunately, the bill introduced by Senator Rockefeller has yet to make it past congressional committee, where many good bills go to die.  This is where Americans should renew their efforts: get the bill out of committee, and give the Senate a chance to vote.

Republicans and Democrats may not agree on much, but both sides of the aisle can agree that a good government considers the needs of its citizens.  A good government allows individuals to thrive.  So many seniors have worked the majority of their lives to provide for themselves, their family, and the prosperity of the nation.  Now is not the time to turn our backs on them and to profit off their illnesses. It is time to make it possible for all Americans to retire with dignity.

 

 

 

 

Cellblocks and Border Stops: Transformative Activism in an Age of Dehumanization.

IPPImage

Confirmed speakers include: Cornel West, john powell, Pramila Jayapal

Transformative Activism in an Age of Dehumanization

Join us as we bring together hundreds of organizers, academics, policy leaders, journalists, and grassroots activists to examine the intersection of immigration control and mass incarceration, and to consider the future of activism and organizing in these areas.

Organized by the Alliance for a Just Society’s Institute for Pragmatic Practice, in conjunction with national and local collaborators, the symposium will:

Food Stamps and Farmers: The House of Representatives Got it So Wrong

After failing to pass a Farm Bill that included farm subsidies and food assistance (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps) in June, the House of Representatives narrowly passed a skeleton of a Farm Bill on July 11—without the food stamps. The House effectively left 46 million Americans wondering how to feed themselves and their families.

The response from House Republican leadership? House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio shrugged and said: “If ands and buts were candy and nuts, every day would be Christmas. (check out an irreverent look at Mr. Boehner) You’ve heard that before. My goal right now is to get the Farm Bill passed. We’ll get to those other issues later.” (NY Times, July 11)

So the hungry and indigent just have to wait until pigs fly, or Christmas comes in July. Congressmen who own farms themselves will get their subsidies, along with family farmers who actually need the federal support. Meanwhile, those other issues like food security; will have to wait. Indefinitely.

Continue reading “Food Stamps and Farmers: The House of Representatives Got it So Wrong”

The Alliance Hosts Our First National Conference in Baltimore and DC

A week ago, to the day, the Alliance for A Just Society hosted our 2013 Summer Conference with all our national affiliates (#Justice2013). There was no better way to kick it off than taking close to 200 participants into Washington DC and hosting three separate actions on the Hill.

As of this year, we are proud to note the following states affiliated with the Alliance for a Just Society and Main Street Alliance: Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Nevada, New York, Virginia, Michigan, Ohio, Iowa, Maine, Florida, Colorado and Connecticut.

 

State affiliate.Alliance and MainStreet

The morning of July 18 began with The Main Street Alliance hosting a forum on “Too Big To Fail”—addressing the policy conundrum where favors are given to Big Banks at the expense of the common good. Senator Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), FDIC Vice Chairman Thomas Hoenig, economist Simon Johnson, and a panel of small business owners and policy experts each spoke of the need for renewed attention to megabank limits in order to stabilize the financial system and support the Main Street economy.Continue reading “The Alliance Hosts Our First National Conference in Baltimore and DC”