|
Mark Dayton on Health Care
Former Democratic Jr Senator (MN, 2001-2007)
|
National single-payer health care system
Today there is one health insurance employee for every two doctors in America! What a misallocation of resources!
I favor a national single-payer health care system, because it puts health care dollars into taking care of people, not insurance company profits.
Source: Campaign website, markdayton.org, "On the Issues"
, Nov 2, 2010
Donated Senate salary to reimport seniors' drugs from Canada
Too many seniors' lives are being destroyed by predatory prescription drug prices, costly supplemental health insurance, and unaffordable long-term care. As U.S. Senator, I donated my salary to help seniors buy cheaper prescription drugs in Canada.
As Governor, my Lt. Governor will lead a similar effort here at home.
Source: Campaign website, markdayton.org, "On the Issues"
, Nov 2, 2010
Immediate health care coverage for all Americans
Health care is an essential need of all Americans and I support immediate health care coverage for all Americans. This can be a system that combines employer mandates and single-payer, spreading the cost among employers, government and citizens.
And, I fully support a “Doctors Decide” Health Care Guarantee - the only real Patients Bill of Rights.
Source: www.MarkDaytonForMN.com , campaign web site
, Nov 7, 2000
Doctors decide, not HMOs or insurance companies
A “Doctors Decide” Health Care Guarantee: A major step toward increased accessibility to health care is establishing a “Doctors Decide” standard for all health care benefits, in which all health maintenance organizations and health
insurance companies would be required to cover any procedure a doctor deems necessary for treatment. There can be no more rejections or delays of treatments when a person’s well being hangs in the balance.
A “Doctors Decide” program must also include: the right to appeal any denial of treatment to an outside review board, better access to specialists, the right to hold health maintenance organizations
accountable for their actions, and guaranteed coverage of emergency room treatment.
Source: www.MarkDaytonForMN.com , campaign web site
, Nov 7, 2000
Employer-mandated coverage and universal insurance
- Employer-mandated coverage: requires employers to provide health insurance to all their employees. Many European countries have successfully integrated employer-mandated coverage into their health care systems. This addresses the 70% of uninsured
who are employed but without insurance; however, it continues to leave 13 million people who are not employed without access to health care services.
- Benefits provided through a public/private insurer of last resort: provides access to health care
services for those who are not covered by employer health care benefits. It would be administered by a quasi-public insurance agency.
- All senior citizens should receive Medicare coverage for all prescription drugs: The federal government
must step in directly and negotiate lower prescription prices for all Americans. If HMOs and self-insuring businesses can negotiate 20-40% price reductions, the federal government should do the same for senior citizens and all American consumers.
Source: www.MarkDaytonForMN.com , campaign web site
, Nov 7, 2000
Expand Medicare Rx coverage & other coverage
My plan for universal health care is based on the belief that our society should provide and finance good health care for all Americans. I support making health insurance premiums tax deductible for individuals and the self-employed immediately.
In order to lower the cost of health insurance, purchasing pools would be established. I will continue to support the health care systems we have in place such as Medicaid, Medicare and Veterans health benefits
and will work to expand coverage and benefits where most needed. The centerpiece of my agenda is the expansion of Medicare coverage for prescription drugs for all seniors. My plan will also provide discounts of at least 10%
on all prescription drugs so that all Americans will benefit. I believe that efforts should be made to correct the inequities of Medicare reimbursement rates between urban and rural areas.
Source: Minnesota Newspaper Association Election Questionnaire
, Jul 2, 2000
Tobacco industry is highly culpable
Q: Did you not sign the Heart Association’s tobacco pledge? A: Yes, I did sign it. I believe that the tobacco industry is highly culpable, if the allegations about its withholding of medical information from the
American public and from members of Congress are proven correct. I believe that its advertisements and promotions geared toward children and adolescents are immoral and obscene.
Source: Campaign Central Survey
, Jul 2, 1998
Voted NO on limiting medical liability lawsuits to $250,000.
A "cloture motion" cuts off debate. Voting YEA indicates support for the bill as written, in this case to cap medical liability lawsuits. Voting NAY indicates opposition to the bill or a desire to amend it. This bill would "provide improved medical care by reducing the excessive burden the liability system places on the health care delivery system." It would limit medical lawsuit noneconomic damages to $250,000 from the health care provider, and no more than $500,000 from multiple health care institutions.Proponents of the motion recommend voting YEA because:- Many doctors have had to either stop practicing medicine due to increased insurance premiums.
- Patients are affected as well--due to rising malpractice rates, more and more patients are not able to find the medical specialists they need.
- The cost of medical malpractice insurance premiums are having wide-ranging effects. It is a national problem, and it is time for a national solution.
- I am pleased that
S. 22 extends liability protections to all health care providers and institutions.
- These bills are a commonsense solution to a serious problem, and it is time for us to vote up or down on this legislation.
Opponents of the motion recommend voting NAY because: - We have virtually no evidence that caps on economic damages will actually lower insurance rates. And in my view, these caps are not fair to victims.
- If we want to reduce malpractice insurance premiums we must address these problems as well as looking closely at the business practices of the insurance companies. What we shouldn't do is limit the recovery of victims of horrible injury to an arbitrarily low sum.
- This is obviously a complicated issue. This is the kind of issue that needs to be explored in depth in our committees so that a consensus can emerge. So I will vote no on cloture, and I hope that these bills will go through committees before we begin floor consideration of this important topic.
Reference: Medical Care Access Protection Act;
Bill S. 22
; vote number 2006-115
on May 8, 2006
Voted YES on expanding enrollment period for Medicare Part D.
To provide for necessary beneficiary protections in order to ensure access to coverage under the Medicare part D prescription drug program. Voting YES would extend the 6-month enrollment period for the Prescription Drug Benefit Program to the entire year of 2006 and allows beneficiaries to change plans once in that year, without penalty, after enrollment. Also would fully reimburse pharmacies, states and individuals for cost in 2006 for covered Medicare Part D drugs.
Reference: Medicare Part D Amendment;
Bill S Amdt 2730 to HR 4297
; vote number 2006-005
on Feb 2, 2006
Voted YES on increasing Medicaid rebate for producing generics.
Vote on an amendment that removes an increase in the Medicaid deduction rebate for generic drugs from 11% to 17%. The effect of the amendment, according to its sponsor, is as follows: "This bill eliminates the ability of generic drugs to be sold using Medicaid. Over half the prescription drugs used in Medicaid are generic. Because we have raised the fees so dramatically on what a generic drug company must pay a pharmacy to handle the drug, pharmacies are not going to use the generic. In the long run, that will cost the Medicaid Program billions of dollars. My amendment corrects that situation." A Senator opposing the amendment said: "This bill has in it already very significant incentives for generic utilization through the way we reimburse generics. Brand drugs account for 67% of Medicaid prescriptions, but they also account for 81% of the Medicaid rebates. This is reasonable policy for us, then, to create parity between brand and generic rebates. This amendment would upset that parity."
Reference: Amendment for Medicaid rebates for generic drugs;
Bill S Amdt 2348 to S 1932
; vote number 2005-299
on Nov 3, 2005
Voted YES on negotiating bulk purchases for Medicare prescription drug.
Vote to adopt an amendment that would allow federal government negotiations with prescription drug manufactures for the best possible prescription drug prices. Amendment details: To ensure that any savings associated with legislation that provides the Secretary of Health and Human Services with the authority to participate in the negotiation of contracts with manufacturers of covered part D drugs to achieve the best possible prices for such drugs under Medicare Part D of the Social Security Act, that requires the Secretary to negotiate contracts with manufacturers of such drugs for each fallback prescription drug plan, and that requires the Secretary to participate in the negotiation for a contract for any such drug upon the request of a prescription drug plan or an MA-PD plan, is reserved for reducing expenditures under such part.
Reference: Prescription Drug Amendment;
Bill S.Amdt. 214 to S.Con.Res. 18
; vote number 2005-60
on Mar 17, 2005
Voted YES on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit.
S. 1 As Amended; Prescription Drug and Medicare Improvement Act of 2003. Vote to pass a bill that would authorize $400 billion over 10 years to create a prescription drug benefit for Medicare recipients beginning in 2006. Seniors would be allowed to remain within the traditional fee-for-service program or seniors would have the option to switch to a Medicare Advantage program that includes prescription drug coverage. Private insurers would provide prescription drug coverage. Private Insurers would engage in competitive bidding to be awarded two-year regional contracts by the Center for Medicare Choices under the Department of Health and Human Services.Enrolled seniors would pay a $275 deductible and an average monthly premium of $35. Annual drug costs beyond the deductible and up to $4,500 would be divided equally between the beneficiary and the insurer. Beneficiaries with incomes below 160 percent of the poverty level would be eligible for added assistance.
Reference: Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit bill;
Bill S.1/H.R.1
; vote number 2003-262
on Jun 26, 2003
Voted YES on allowing reimportation of Rx drugs from Canada.
S. 812, as amended; Greater Access to Affordable Pharmaceuticals Act of 2002. Vote to pass a bill that would permit a single 30-month stay against Food and Drug Administration approval of a generic drug patent when a brand-name company's patent is challenged. The secretary of Health and Human Services would be authorized to announce regulations allowing pharmacists and wholesalers to import prescription drugs from Canada into the United States. Canadian pharmacies and wholesalers that provide drugs for importation would be required to register with Health and Human Services. Individuals would be allowed to import prescription drugs from Canada. The medication would have to be for an individual use and a supply of less than 90-days.
Reference:
Bill S.812
; vote number 2002-201
on Jul 31, 2002
Voted YES on allowing patients to sue HMOs & collect punitive damages.
Vote to provide federal protections, such as access to specialty and emergency room care, and allow patients to sue health insurers in state and federal courts. Economic damages would not be capped, and punitive damages would be capped at $5 million.
Reference:
Bill S1052
; vote number 2001-220
on Jun 29, 2001
Voted NO on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit.
Vote to pass an amendment that would make up to $300 billion available for a Medicare prescription drug benefit for 2002 through 2011. The money would come from the budget's contingency fund. The amendment would also require a Medicare overhaul.
Reference:
Bill H Con Res 83
; vote number 2001-65
on Apr 3, 2001
Invest funds to alleviate the nursing shortage.
co-sponsored the Nurse Reinvestment Act
- Amends Medicare to provide for nurse education training payments to qualified entities.
- Amends Medicaid to temporarily increase the matching rate for Medicaid nurse aide training and competency evaluation programs.
- Amends the Internal Revenue Code to provide for the exclusion from gross income of amounts received under the National Nursing Service Corps Scholarship Program.
- Amends the Public Health Service Act to: (1) develop and issue public service announcements that advertise and promote the nursing profession, highlight the advantages and rewards of nursing, and encourage individuals from diverse communities and backgrounds to enter the nursing profession; and (2) award grants to designated eligible educational entities in order to increase the number of nurses.
- Establishes a National Nurse Service Corps Scholarship program that provides scholarships to individuals seeking nursing education in exchange for service by such individuals in areas with nursing shortages. Authorizes appropriations.
Source: Bill sponsored by 39 Senators 01-S706 on Apr 5, 2001
Let states make bulk Rx purchases, and other innovations.
signed a letter from 30 Senators to the Secretary of HHS
To: The Honorable Tommy G. Thompson, Secretary, Department of Health & Human Services
Dear Secretary Thompson:
As you know, prescription drug costs have been surging at double-digit rates for the last six years. The average annual increase 1999 through 2003 was a massive 16%, seven times the rate of general inflation.
These increases fall hardest on senior citizens and the uninsured. Their health needs are often great, and their low incomes often make these products unaffordable. They have no ability to use their combined purchasing power to negotiate reasonable prices. Taxpayers pay tens of billions of dollars for the purchase of drugs by Medicaid—an expense that could be reduced significantly if states are permitted to negotiate for the best prices from drug manufacturers.
As you know, the Supreme Court has just ruled that Maine's innovative program to reduce prescription drug costs for the uninsured and senior citizens is not a violation of the Medicaid law.
As a result of this decision, Maine can use the combined buying power of Medicaid and individuals purchasing drugs on their own to negotiate lower prices with drug manufacturers. Twenty-nine other states supported the position taken by Maine, and there is broad interest in many states in initiating similar programs.
The Supreme Court's ruling, however, left open the possibility that if the Department of Health and Human Services makes a finding that the Maine program violates the Medicaid statute, the Department's action would be upheld by the Court. We urge you not to intervene to block Maine's program or similar statutes in other states that achieve savings for taxpayers, the elderly, and the uninsured. Such programs must be carefully implemented to assure that the poor are not denied access to needed drugs, but there is no justification for the federal government to deny states the ability to negotiate lower drug prices on behalf of their neediest citizens.
Source: Letter from 30 Senators to the Secretary of HHS 03-SEN6 on May 20, 2003
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record.
scores 100% by APHA on health issues
The American Public Health Association (APHA) is the oldest and largest organization of public health professionals in the world, representing more than 50,000 members from over 50 occupations of public health. APHA is concerned with a broad set of issues affecting personal and environmental health, including federal and state funding for health programs, pollution control, programs and policies related to chronic and infectious diseases, a smoke-free society, and professional education in public health.
The following ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.
Source: APHA website 03n-APHA on Dec 31, 2003
Page last updated: Nov 05, 2011