RECENT POSTS
- Oprah, Health Care Lobbyists, Among Recent Visitors to White House
- An Obama Thanksgiving Menu, with an Extra Serving of Pie
- White House Thanksgiving Traditions: Broken and Observed
- Obama, GOP Air Differences Over Jobs, Economy In Thanksgiving Addresses
- White House State Dinner Party Crashers
- Obama to Lay Out Emissions Goals in Copenhagen
- Free Bird
- The "Good" War
- The Presidential Planner
- Under the Stars, Obama Toasts India’s Prime Minister
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Edwards: Clinton Campaign Lacks Conscience
January 06, 2008 11:11 PM
The campaigns of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., and former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., have gotten into an ugly little back and forth about the recent death of 17-year-old Nataline Sarkisyan, and whether she would be alive today if Edwards had been a better legislator during his one Senate term, as Clinton suggested in last night's debate.
During the debate, Edwards said that when he was in the Senate, he fought for the "'Patient's Bill of Rights,' so that patients and families can make their own health care decisions. What's happening now is, insurance companies are running all over people. I mean, the case of Nataline Sarkisyan, which a lot of the audience would be familiar with -- 17-year-old girl who lost her life a couple of weeks ago, because her insurance company would not pay for a liver transplant operation. She had health insurance, but the insurance company wouldn't pay for it. They finally caved in a few hours before she died."
Edwards added, "We need a president who will take these people on." He, Sens. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., and John McCain, R-Ariz., "took on the powerful insurance industry and their lobby every single day of the fight for the Patient's Bill of Rights, and we got that bill through the United States Senate, and got it passed."
Clinton pointed out, correctly, that the Patient's Bill of Rights is not law. "Can we just have a sort of a reality break for a minute?" she said. "Because I think that it is important to make some kind of an assessment of these statements."
The bill, Clinton pointed out, "never got through the House. One of the reasons that Nataline may well have died, is because there isn't a Patient's Bill of Rights. We don't have a Patient's Bill of Rights."
"Because George Bush -- George Bush killed it," Edwards said.
"Well, that's right, he killed it," Clinton agreed. "So, we've got to have a plan and a real push to get it through. ... what we've got to do is translate talk into action and feeling into reality. I have a long record of doing that, of taking on the very interests that you have just rightly excoriated, because of the overdue influence that they have in our government."
What actually happened in the House, the Patient's Bill of Rights was backed by the late Rep. Charlie Norwood, R-Ga., who, under pressure from the Bush White House and GOP House leadership, ditched his own legislation, and backed a watered-down version, which passed, essentially scuttling the bill.)
ABC News' David Muir reports on how the Sarkisyan family joined Edwards on the campaign trail today.
The Sarkisyan family's presence on the trail Sunday prompted Clinton spokesman Jay Carson to tell Ben Smith of the Politico, "In order to be president, you need to do more than read articles about people who need help, and talk about them," adding that Clinton was "somebody who's actually going to help people, and not use them as talking points."
In Manchester, N.H., today, Edwards said that Clinton's “campaign doesn’t seem to have a conscience.
"This is not about them," meaning the Clintons, Edwards said. "It’s about families like the Sarkisyans, the Lowes, and the Lakeys, who desperately need a voice.
"I was willing, last night, to let this issue go, and even willing to let it go earlier today," he said. "The more I thought about the idea that, somehow, everything is about them -– it’s an indication that they have no conscience about what’s at stake here. These families are what this is about. It’s not about them, nor is it about me. It’s about whether we're going to actually stand up and fight for these people.
"If she wants to argue with me, or the campaign wants to argue with me about my position about some issue, they’re totally entitled to do that. But to talk this way about families who have struggled and suffered and want to be heard –- the Lakeys, James Lowe, the Sarkisyans -- they didn’t come here by accident. They believe they have a responsibility to their families and their children to create a better America, and make certain that what happened in the Sarkisyan family’s case, never happens to any other family. I’m proud of them. Everyone should be proud of them."
Lost in all of this ... I'm not so certain that if the Patient's Bill of Rights were law, that would have changed anything in the tragic case of Nataline Sarkisyan.
The Edwards/Kennedy/McCain bill would have established "a swift internal review process" within insurance companies, as well as "a fair and independent external appeals process."
Sarkisyan had leukemia, and had been in a persistent vegetative state for three weeks. Physicians determined she would benefit from a bone marrow transplant. Her brother, Bedig Sarkisyan, was a match and donated his bone marrow in November.
Unfortunately, she developed complications. Her liver was failing. So, doctors recommended a liver transplant, and told her insurance company, Cigna HealthCare, which rejected the request, because her plan does not cover "experimental, investigational and unproven services."
Cigna president David Cordani said his company has a record of approving coverage for more than 90 percent of all transplants, and more than 90 percent of the liver transplants. The decision about Sarkisyan was made using "evidence-based guidelines published by independent physician and medical organizations, as well as expert scientific journals," he said.
The Sarkisyans filed an appeal with the California Department of Insurance. The department requested more information from the Sarkisyans. Under public pressure, Cigna reversed its decision, but it was too late for Nataline.
But if the Patient's Bill of Rights were law -- and this is pure speculation -- what would be different? Cigna claims it did an exhaustive and expedited review. The Sarkisyans appealed to an outside group. The transplant was approved. She tragically passed away.
Maybe an independent review would have expedited everything more quickly than the California Department of Insurance.
And maybe the liver transplant would have succeeded.
And maybe Nataline's leukemia would have been cured.
And maybe not.
A tragic story, and you will never find me standing first in line to defend health insurance companies' decisions like these. But let's not pretend a law would have prevented her tragic death.
Or even, more cynically, that the failure of Edwards' bill to become law means that Edwards' weaknesses as a legislator cost her her life.
Yuck.
-- jpt
January 6, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (26)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Let's face it, all of the candidates want to be President. The question is then, "Which candidate would be the best President for the people of the United States?" Does anyone really believe that candidates who are beholden to corporations, drug companies, oil companies, and their lobbyists would make the best President for the American people? John Edwards is the ONLY candidate who will stand up for the people and will not cater to the lobbyists or large corporations. This is clear from his record. He is also the ONLY candidate that polls show will be able to beat any Republican candidate in the general election. So.....let's get real! The ONLY Democratic candidate who is truly electable and who will truly work for the American people is John Edwards.
Posted by: Kris Romer | Jan 7, 2008 5:39:02 AM
I'm disgusted by Hillary's campaigning tactics but in a conflicted fashion, I'm not sure I want her dirty politics to stop. It is Bill and Hillary's ugly politics that propels voters towards Obama's message of hope and healing. I don't know about you, but everytime I hear Hillary attack Obama or Edwards, I turn her off and embrace Obama further.
Posted by: Ann B. | Jan 7, 2008 4:50:47 AM
The Clinton campaign will stop at nothing. Shame on them. John Edwards is speaking to the actual difficulties people are having making ends meet in a time when American maldistribution of wealth is greater than any time since 1929. Hillary, meanwhile, talks about...Hillary and how she deserves the presidency because of "35 years" of experience. Give me a break. She's been a Senator for six years. Edwards is right: there are two candidates of change, and Hillary isn't one of them.
Posted by: C.P. | Jan 7, 2008 4:12:42 AM
Edwards is nothing more than a useless, opportunistic demagogue, who has absolutely nothing good to show from his years in public life.
In the debate, he was asked what one big thing he has accomplished. We now know that that one BIG thing, the Patient Bill of Rights which never saw the light of day, was his "biggest" accomplishment.
Of course, he couldn't think of anything else --- there was none.
And so I wince whenever I see this guy speaks because I know that what will come out of this dude's mouth will be nothing more than a play on people's emotions. Simply stated: all passion, no substance.
This opportunist should stay out of the race right after New Hampshire.
Posted by: Otillap | Jan 7, 2008 2:52:11 AM
The ESSENCE of what John Edwards believes is the rightful RESPONSIBILITY of our elected leaders is the point here.
The patient's Bill of Rights would have been a good start and a warning flag to over-priced, under-providing health insurance companies. Companies who, I hope are soon going to be faced with extinction when the RIGHT President is elected.
EVERY AMERICAN should have the right to good healthcare, every single person. Rich or poor. healthy or struggling with illness. All of us.
Furthermore, we need shorter work weeks and longer vacation times, because this rat race is driving us crazy.
We are like little hamsters in cages, turning that BUY!BUY!BUY! cage as we are distractedly being brainwashed by corporate advertising. Work more so you can buy more!
having "more stuff" doesn't qualify as adding to our quality of life.
It simply requires us to work more to be able to afford those things we are told we must have. At inflated prices, even.
European countries like France and England and Norway and Denmark have no problem with granting this inalienable right to their citizens AND balancing their budgets. Nor does Canada.
So the only holdup is....the insurance lobbyists, it appears to me.
Americans, the true trustees, the stewards of our country, need to register the fact that John Edwards has taken NO money from Lobbyists who haunt DC. He is beholden to no one except the American people for his campaign funding. No INSURANCE, NO OIL COMPANIES, the two biggest baddest debbils in the American economy today...HE OWES THEM NOTHING.
That's a very advantageous place to start your term in the White House if, in fact, you DO plan to do a little butt-kicking.
And BTW, John Edwards made his money fighting the insurance companies and WINNING IN A COURT OF LAW BASED ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL RIGHTS OF HIS CLIENT, winning on points of law AND STANDARDS OF REASONABLE ETHICS that the companies were BLATANTLY IGNORING.
Who could possibly say that was not an honorable way to make a living?
Certainly not a true American.
Posted by: barbara f | Jan 7, 2008 12:56:50 AM
How is attacking a mother who just lost her child due to bad claims practices on the part of a health insurance company helping Hillary? Or furthering the dialogue in this country?
Or having anything to do with fixing this problem.
This is nasty, political nonsense. And Mrs. Sarkisyan should not be attacked for speaking her mind after her child's death.
Posted by: Jen Q | Jan 7, 2008 12:27:21 AM
Post a comment
