Elizabeth Edwards: "Reform Health Care Responsibly, Morally, and Aggressively."

Crossposted from BlueNC

As today marked the 30th anniversary of the "War on Cancer," Elizabeth Edwards and Lance Armstrong appeared at a US Senate Committee Panel to push for a renewed fight against cancer.

Elizabeth Edwards,  one of the nation's most outspoken and effective advocates for universal healthcare coverage, takes this issue very personally. A survivor of breast cancer, Elizabeth told a panel led by Senator Ted Kennedy, "...we've chosen as a nation to turn our backs on some of us who have the disease. I urge you to reform health care responsibly, morally, and aggressively."

Elizabeth opened her testimony by describing an interaction that she had with a mother who had a lump in her breast but was afraid to get it checked out because she did not have health coverage. As Elizabeth noted, those who are uninsured are "more likely to die within the five year period." Elizabeth went on to discuss the impediments to adequate health insurance, cancer prevention, and early detection aspects.

Watch Elizabeth Edwards' main testimony here:

Elizabeth on Cancer Prevention and Detection

Elizabeth Edwards and Lance Armstrong are backing legislation "sponsored by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, R-Texas, to create a more comprehensive approach to fighting cancer."


The measure seeks to improve the coordination of cancer research, prevention and treatment while giving more money to the National Cancer Institute and other public research agencies.

"We think the American people want action - and they deserve action," said Kennedy. "It's a complex disease and it requires comprehensive strategies to fight it."

Lance Armstrong, a survivor of metastasized testicular cancer, told the panel that "for us to win, we also have to be ruthless and renlentless."


"This is a major fight." This is a major war. And this is something, as I said, it doesn't care if you're Republican or you're Democrat, if you're young or you're old, if you're black or you're white, Native American, you're rich or you're poor. It comes and it comes hard. And it is ruthless and it is relentless. And for us to win, we also have to be ruthless and relentless. And so I encourage all of us to do that. Renew the war on cancer, renew a comprehensive war on cancer, and ultimately make sure that our kids and our grandkids don't have to face this."

Watch Lance Armstrong's testimony here:

With healthcare coverage being a top issue of the campaign season, there is no better time to "whisper in the right person's ear" about this issue.  Both Democratic Presidential candidates, Obama and Clinton  aim to provide healthcare coverage for all while Republican Presidential candidate McCain's disastrous healthcare plan "will be prohibitively expensive or gone if you have a pre-existing condition" Only those who are "healthy and wealthy" will benefit from McCain's plan.


Overall, the McCain plan would raise taxes on workers in an effort to eviscerate the current health care system in the name of free market idolatry. To the extent it fails to completely destroy the existing system--as McCain's advisor anticipates--it would saddle the average family with $24oo in extra taxes to penalize them for having employer-sponsored care. And if the McCain plan succeeded in killing the current system, it would leave tens of millions unable to buy any care, until he comes up with some new safety net, details to be provided later, i.e. never.
McCain's HealthCare Plan

IOW, McCain is willing to give the corporate industries a "free ride on the backs of sick people." As Elizabeth Edwards stated today, "this is an issue that has no political boundaries, it has moral boundaries."

Whisper it in the right person's ear.

Tags: cancer prevention and research, Elizabeth Edwards, lance armstrong, mcain, universal healthcare, us senate panel (all tags)

Comments

13 Comments

Well may if...

she had come out and supported the ONLY candidate in the race that wanted FULL Universal Healthcare reform - we MIGHT have had a chance to get it....

as it is....I guess those that have cancer and no insurance will simply have to DIE.

by nikkid 2008-05-08 03:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Well may if...

Elizabeth did say she prefers Hillary's healthcare plan.

But, I do not believe, for a moment, that Elizabeth' endorsement of Hillary as a candidate will make or break Hillary's campaign.

I certainly hope you are not blaming Elizabeth Edwards for Hillary's potential loss because that would be just be absurd.

by NCDemAmy 2008-05-08 03:38PM | 0 recs
The huge difference between the two candidates is

going to mean the difference between coverage and no coverage for millions of people. Obama's 'plan' is obviously a lie, intended to get him into office. I know that is a strong statement, but its backed up by the fact that every single simulation of the dynamics of healthcare expenses and the mechanics of insurance show that Obama's 'plan' can't work for the simple reason that insurers are going to lose lots of money on it if there are not lots of healthy people insured to make up for those with health conditions. Obama has recently changed his web site to imply that his plan will cover people with pre existing conditions but nobody believes that, not even his own staff.

Clinton has made a committment to universality and its a cornerstone of her campaign.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/28/us/pol itics/28clinton.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/04/busine ss/04insure.html

http://online.wsj.com/public/article_pri nt/SB119681696156513818.html

by architek 2008-05-08 04:35PM | 0 recs
The huge difference between the two candidates is

I do agree that Hillary has a better healthcare plan. But, both Hillary's and Obama's are far better than McCain's.

Thanks for the links!

by NCDemAmy 2008-05-08 04:40PM | 0 recs
Obama's model is VERY WRONG..

For example, since insurance is still priced by risk, THIS STUFF WON'T STOP. (It can't be stopped.)

http://www.latimes.com/features/health/l a-fi-healthinsure-sg,1,3627886.storygall ery

by architek 2008-05-08 07:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Well may if...

Mrs. Edwards has supported Hillary's healthcare plan on several news programs, and in interviews.

Mrs. Edward's decision to remain neutral so far in an endorsement of a candidate has not stopped her from supporting Hillary on this important issue.

I respect Elizabeth Edward's decision to be neutral. Some leaders need to remain neutral so they can help bring the party back together after a nominee is chosen.

by bettync 2008-05-08 03:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Well may if...

Exactly, bettync, well said!

by NCDemAmy 2008-05-08 03:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Elizabeth Edwards

Elizabeth does a wonderful job of making the complex issue of healthcare clear to people.

I think she and Lance Armstrong made a strong case, and in the little bit I saw on MSNBC it looked like the Senators were paying attention.

by bettync 2008-05-08 03:47PM | 0 recs
whats the URL?

Of the show..

by architek 2008-05-08 07:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Elizabeth Edwards

She is just so good.  God bless you Elizabeth!

by Steve M 2008-05-08 04:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Elizabeth Edwards

Indeed she is.

How could anyone not love that woman!

Elizabeth recieved a "Mother of the Year" award today too. She is one busy person.

by NCDemAmy 2008-05-08 04:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Elizabeth Edwards

Agreed. Elizabeth is playing an important role bringing UHC back into the media spotlight again. I want her to continue to speak out about McCain's health care plan. We can't depend on the MSM to talk about the health care crisis in real terms so we have to depend on people like Elizabeth who can get MSM air time to bring up UHC.

by Sarah Lane 2008-05-08 07:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Elizabeth Edwards

Thanks for keeping health care in the spotlight. There are too many lives being lost in the US. We're ranked by the World Health Organization as 37th in health car, behind Costa Rica and before Slovenia.

by CyberCitizen 2008-05-08 08:50PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------