Dear Doctors for Obama,
We have an opportunity to act. The Senate is poised to vote on the Stimulus Package. The House version of the stimulus bill, HR-1, contained some key provisions to promote prevention and wellness, but an influential gruop of senators is reportedly trying to cut or eliminate these key measures.
We need doctors to speak up now about this important issue. Let’s tell the Senate that we believe America needs to invest in prevention and wellness now more than ever – these cuts will not help us provide better care for our patients.
Please sign the letter below (see bottom of email) by e-mailing your name, professional degree, state (e.g. FL), and institutional affiliation to healthystimulusdfo@gmail.com
If you are a member of the Institute of Medicine, NAS, or enjoy any other honorific that should be noted, please note it.
Consider the following proposals which President Obama has made which certain Senators are trying to cut:
* $400 million to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for the screening and prevention of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV
* $75 million for smoking cessation
* $870 million to prepare for a pandemic influenza outbreak
* $20 billion to help providers adopt health IT.
Although these are not big dollar items, they would create jobs while preventing thousands of deaths and illness.
Opponents of the stimulus bill are organized and active. But we too are ready to20respond. Please join Doctors for Obama in voicing your opposition to these cuts
Sign the letter (see bottom of email): Email your name, professional degree, title, and institutional affiliation to healthystimulusdfo@gmail.com
Given the time-sensitivity of this matter, we can accept names until Monday, February 9, 2009 at 12:00pm. The sooner the better, since we don’t know the Senate voting schedule.
Please forward this to medical or public health professional, researcher, or policy analysts you believe would be interested in signing this letter. Your personal networks are the most valuable way to quickly generate visible support.
In Solidarity,
Doctors for Obama
——————————————————————————————————————————————-
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) provides needed economic stimulus while laying the groundwork for many investments important to our nation’s future. The House of Representatives has passed its version, HR-1. The Senate is now debating its own bill.
We, the undersigned, reflect many disciplines within public health, medical care, and policy research. We hold diverse political views, and have diverse ideas about how best to enact healthcare reform. We are united, however, in the belief that the public health provisions included in HR-1 provide a feasible, timely, and cost-effective approach to improving America’s health.
We are thus disturbed by reports of deep proposed cuts to prevention and wellness programs (as well as by proposed cuts to in other areas such as education and disability assistance) rumored to be under consideration.
The Washington Post, in its February 4, 2009 edition, reports that some Senators propose to cut or eliminate funds for comparative medical research, smoking cessation, HIV prevention and testing. Additional reports indicate deep proposed cuts in diabetes screening and detection, pandemic flu preparedness, health information technology, and other key public health items. Whether one evaluates these expenditures as short-term economic stimulus or in broader public health terms, each of these proposed expenditures represents sound public policy.
During 2008 campaign, Democrats and Republicans supported increased investment in comparative medical research to improve the quality and cost-effectiveness of American medical care. As Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel noted in his book Healthcare, Guaranteed: “The United States spends over $2 trillion on healthcare, about $200 billion on prescription drugs, and nearly $100 billion on medical research and development, but only a paltry $1 billion to evaluate the comparative costs and effectiveness of medical interventions and their influence on health outcomes.”
The agencies t hat support this research employ rigorous scientific peer-review to allocate available funds. Many high-quality projects are ready for immediate implementation in hospitals, medical practices, and universities across the United States.
Health information technology is equally central. Electronic medical record systems improve continuity of care and can improve cost-effectiveness by reducing medical errors and by preventing duplicative diagnostic procedures and tests.
The broader array of prevention and wellness measures are equally essential to health and well-being. By some measures, diabetes is America’s most costly and prevalent major chronic illness. Prevalence is increasing due to increased prevalence of adult-onset disorders. Modest proposed expenditures for diabetes screening and management are therefore especially valuable.
HR-1 also includes funds for the prevention of HIV, sexually-transmitted infection, and tuberculosis. Federal expenditures in these critical areas have lagged in recent years. A variety of evidence-based interventions could be quickly implemented to address these public health challenges within the range appropriated in the House bill.
We are especially surprised by proposals to eliminate funds for smoking cessation services. Smoking remains America’s most prevalent and avoidable cause of premature illness and death. Smoking cessation services rank among the most cost-effective interventions in all of medicine and public health. The proposed $75 million would=2 0create roughly 1,500 jobs. Moreover, it would help roughly 45,000 people quit smoking, preventing many thousands of smoking-related deaths and serious illnesses.
During the 2008 campaign, candidates across the political spectrum demanded that our health system place greater weight on prevention to reduce avoidable deaths, injury, and illness, and to improve cost-effectiveness. Unfortunately, many prevention measures are politically vulnerable because they improve health among diffuse, disorganized, sometimes politically marginal constituencies.
The hope for such measures often rests with leaders who set aside momentary political pressures to ask what is really needed to promote a healthier America. If the Senate does this, it will retain the modest but crucial public health expenditures contained in the House bill.
Signed,
(Titles and institutional affiliations are provided for informational purposes only, and do not indicate endorsement or support by any organization)