Can anyone explain what exactly Stern's position is?  It comes off very incoherently in the articles I've collected over the months, and this one is not very helpful.  In one paragraph he sounds like a proponent of the so-called private welfare state: "So during today's meeting, Mr. Stern and Mr. Scott will announce a campaign to seek public acceptance of several principles of health policy. One goal is universal health coverage by a specific date, somewhere around 2012. Another is the idea of shared responsibility, emphasizing that individuals, businesses and government all play roles in financing health care and expanding coverage." And in another, a critic: "But in July, the icy relationship between the men began to thaw after Mr. Stern wrote an op-ed article encouraging large corporations to work with unions to create alternatives to the employer-based health coverage system, which he said was collapsing. " <div>On 2/7/07, Doug Henwood <<a href="mailto:dhenwood@panix.com">dhenwood@panix.com</a>> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> On Feb 7, 2007, at 9:08 AM, Mark Rickling wrote: > Wal-Mart and a Union Unite, at Least on Health Policy Call me a dinosaur, but I doubt anything good can come of this. Who's the senior, and who's the junior, partner in this duo? What does this do to the idea of Wal-Mart as the symbol of modern capitalism, which was one of organized labor's prime images? Why does SEIU shun any attempt to build popular organizations for single- payer? Why does Stern dismiss single-payer as "a Canadian import"? You make deals with the devil *after* you've organized some divisions on your side, not before. Doug ___________________________________ <a href="http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk"> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk</a> </blockquote></div>