The Democrats have a terrific issue in prescription-drug coverage, but theircaution on budgetary politics and deference to the pharmaceutical industry couldblow their advantage. President George Bush says he supports drug coverage, buthis budget allows only stripped-down coverage for the poor and near-poor. Thecatch: They first have to spend a lot of money out-of-pocket and most of themcan't afford to do so. It's a phony bill; but except for a few stalwarts likeTed Kennedy and Paul Wellstone, the Democrats are reluctant to pit a decent drugbill against the Bush tax cut.
Enter grass-roots organizing. USAction has teamed up with Public Citizen andFamilies USA to help push the pill problem onto center stage. According toresearch from the Center for Policy Alternatives (www.cfpa.org), here's thedilemma. One-quarter of the population, and more than half the elderly, don'thave prescription-drug coverage. Drug prices have been rising at nearly twice the rate of inflation. Drug companies charge varying amounts for drugs; and theuninsured pay, on average, about twice as much as the federal government does forthe same medicines. As a result, people living on limited incomes often have tochoose between filling prescriptions and eating.
Several key constituencies are directly affected: Seniors make up only 12percent of the population, yet they consume one-third of the drugs. Unionsgenerally have health coverage as a bargaining issue, and the cost of prescription drugs is crowding out other benefits. Low-income people who rely onstate-funded medical-assistance programs are also experiencing recoil becausestates are cutting those programs to compensate for inflated drug prices.
Potentially, this is one powerful coalition. A serious prescription-drug planwould be part of Medicare. It would include price controls on drugs--and relyingon the federal government's bargaining power--or the cost would be prohibitive.At present the Department of Veterans Affairs buys drugs for its VA hospitals injust this manner; but even most Democrats have been skittish about embracingprice controls or proposing full funding for adequate coverage. Why? Pricecontrols would mean challenging both the vogue for free markets and the powerfulpharmaceutical industry, which enjoys special patent protection and chargeswhatever it wants. Adequate funding would require a repeal of the Bush tax cut.
If ever there were an issue where grass-roots organizing could move Congress,this is it. "People are hot about this," notes USAction's Jeff Blum, "especiallyseniors. And seniors understand politics and have time on their hands." Lastyear, 1,000 retirees shut down the Illinois state senate by being so rowdy at arally that lawmakers couldn't conduct business.
At the state level, legislators and activists--borrowing ideas from victoriesin Florida, California, and Maine--have created the Fair Market Drug Pricing Act,which coalitions around the country are backing; and a bill recently made itthrough the Washington state senate. In states that border Canada, where thereare national health insurance and affordable drugs, mainstream politicianssupport price controls. The issue feels a lot like campaign finance reform: Thepeople get it first, and Congress gets it last. For more information, go towww.familiesusa.org andwww.publiccitizen.org.
Roe v. Bush
Although the 29th anniversary of the Supreme Court case Roe v. Wadecame and went on January 22 without much media attention, reproductive-rights organizations were revving their engines. With the Bush administration opposed toabortion, and even taking recent steps to provide health care for fetuses,pro-choice organizations are mounting efforts to block possible setbacks to the1973 landmark case.
Reproductive-rights organizations are heavily targeting Bush's falselyaltruistic attempt to promote state-sponsored health care for fetuses. Inproposing that embryos become individual recipients of government services,pro-lifers are attempting to thwart abortion rights by legislating that fetusesbe considered persons under the law.
Not surprisingly, groups such as Planned Parenthood and the NationalAbortionand Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL) are leading the charge inopposingBush's tactics. Both have established Web sites geared strictly toward monitoringthe Bush administration's position on reproductive rights. NARAL's new site,www.fight4choice.com,provides resources and ways to get involved in the battle.And now that Bush has openly stated that "unborn children should be welcomed inlife and protected in law," several donors to NARAL have offered to double everygift to the organization until March 31.
Support for this issue does not stop with individuals writing checks. Thereare also "Celebrity Teams" sponsored by Million4roe.com, a project of theFeminist Majority. "Be the first Team to reach 250,000 members," the Web sitesays, "and the Feminist Majority will send 5,000 metal coathangers to George W.Bush--1 for each of the US women who will die in the first year frombotched illegal abortions if Roe is overturned."
Activism for reproductive rights doesn't just take place on the Internet. Inearly April, Hampshire College will host the 16th annual conference "FromAbortion Rights to Social Justice: Building a Movement for Reproductive Freedom"in Amherst, Massachusetts. Recommended for community and student activists, thissymposium is free.
