The root of this is not corruption, but the fragmentation and implied political disunity underlying an employer-based system.
Fitch is a good guy. He's stayed in the game for a long time.
mbs
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Henwood" <dhenwood at panix.com>
>Worker-controlled benefit funds is one approach.
-As it happens, I was just reading the bits in Bob Fitch's excellent -new book, Solidarity for Sale, that reviews the history of unions & -public health insurance. It's hideous. Gompers opposed it - thought -it would emasculate the worker. Sweeney voted against it within the -AFL-CIO in the early 1990s. (Cue to John Lacny to fulminate about -this.) And one of the reasons for this, Fitch argues, is -union-controlled benefit funds, which have been sinkholes of -corruption.
I was noting the impulse, not arguing that single payer health insurance wasn't the best system.
And you'll be happy to know that opponents of "fair share" health plans are siting arguments such as Fitch's to demonize unions and anti-Wal-Mart bills. There's no real likelihood of single payer being enacted now, but the accusations of corruption against union funds is enthusiastically being cited in support of moving to 401(k)s and Medical Savings Accounts. So cheerio-- let's bash the unions and promote the end of employer-based benefit funds.
The DLC and the New America Foundation have your back on those arguments.
Nathan Newman
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
---------------------------------------- I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users. It has removed 4660 spam emails to date. Paying users do not have this message in their emails. Try www.SPAMfighter.com for free now!