John J. Sweeney, President of the AFL-CIO
National Press Club
January 18, 2006
… if I were President of the United States, I’d use this State of the Union speech to… challenge Congress to quit stalling and pass universal health coverage this year …
(Later in the speech…)
We need a simple national health care plan that covers everybody…
http://www.aflcio.org/mediacenter/prsptm/sp01182006.cfm
Comment: Everyone across the political spectrum supports “universal health coverage,” even though for some that means only providing everyone with the option of being able to purchase a low-cost, stripped-down plan of “basic” benefits, while excluding those who fail underwriting requirements. Individuals claiming to support universal coverage can be ignored unless they present specifics on a plan for comprehensive coverage that would automatically include absolutely everyone. The problem is that most people who speak about universal coverage really mean covering the most people we can with our fragmented system of public and private programs, recognizing that “we’ll never be able cover absolutely everyone,” often said with a wink and a nod.
What about “a simple national health care plan that covers everybody”? If this is a truly sincere statement, it says much more.
“Everybody” is much more specific than that abused term: “universal.” Presumably “everybody” really does mean everybody.
“National” means federal, as opposed to state and local programs that tend to be patchwork attempts to cover more (or sometimes less) under a shredded system. A national program presumably would be a standardized, equitable program that would cover everyone in the nation.
“Simple” is a term that you don’t hear from most individuals speaking about universal coverage. That is likely because their proposals are complex modifications of our fragmented system, such as the touted consumer-directed health plans that actually reduce coverage. On the other hand, “simple” is a term used by advocates of reform who would replace our complex, highly inefficient and wasteful system of administering health care funds with a simple, publicly-administered single payer system. Could that be what John Sweeney meant?
There is no doubt that John Sweeney’s words were chosen very carefully for this important speech before the National Press Club. As to the meaning behind his words, we anxiously await signals to see if AFL-CIO’s actions will quickly evolve beyond their current efforts to merely target a few large employers.