Home | About | Donate

Biden's HHS Pick Will Be In a Position to Finally Take On the Healthcare Industry

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/12/08/bidens-hhs-pick-will-be-position-finally-take-healthcare-industry


“Xavier Becerra has been a longtime supporter of Medicare for All and has shown willingness to confront pharmaceutical monopolies. There’s a lot he could do to make U.S. healthcare more progressive.”

May it be so.


The healthcare industry is global and the forum where we the people would need to “take them on” - the WTO isnt even accessible to us. Nor do we the people of any country have any more than the single vote our country, the US have there.

We might have control on some abstract level but were always fighting for the maximal profit for our corporations.

We shouldn’t expect miracles or even changes (other than one way deregulation) at the international level ornational level which is subsumed by the deals we enter into, because what they do is restricted to more and deeper deregulation. Reregulation is typically forbidden unless we compensate countries (WTO style FTAS) or corporations (US style FTAS) that demand it.

Look at the story of Slovak republic’s 2006 election where a candidate campaigning on a platform of reversing the recent privatization back to single payer after just a few years, won by a landslide victory. The Slovak Republic was immediately sued under a trade agreement between the previous country “Czechoslovakia” and the Netherlands, Eureko/Achmeas home country, that dated back more than a decade. It was just one of a large number of truly horrible deals, known as the IntraEUBITS…

So Slovakia was sued and millions f euros that the small country has in foreign banks was seized for the “crime” of trying to vote themselves to freedom.
by an health insurer Achmea (then Eureko)

This bgan a long long story that illuminates how we humans have been written out of global economic governance, intentionally to revent thinks like what Sloovakia attempted todo.

Reading the legal documents, many of which can be found on the web site italaw dot com is quite instructive.

The present-day US is making more and more commitments like this, with the obvious intent of locking us into the for profit system irreversibly no matter what future Americans need or vote, or what future Administrations do.

How could that possibly be legal? ??? Basically, what we need or want is now basically totally irrelevant to what gets done. Because were creating ownership rights in policy that are literally property so what we vote for doesn’t touch them, we can only do things that have nothing to do with these new property rights. So basically almost all the things people think we can still vote for are now “owned” by corporations. Health care and drugs policies were committed decades ago.

For example, the Reasoinable Pricing rule was lost in early 1995, so even when the taxpayers have paid for the research that enabled the discovery of some drug, the profits are not able to be influenced by that investment. Literally the entire world is being stolen and laws changed so that its almost impossible in most situations for any of these changes to be reversed or changed by people.

We’re not going to be told this, they don’t ever acknowledge it. And its killing huge numbers of people in these health related areas.


Hes running for California attorney general and his site makes me think he may be a potentially good pick, but its unlikely very unlikely in the current captured state, I think, its far more likely he’s an insider and neoliberal- Its very hard to tell anything these days because trade deals like the GATS and its progeny TISA which likely will soon be revived, make nothing - literally- the way it seems.

And nothing, literally can ever be improved, because we the people are no longer in charge. Politics in the US is now corrupted by the GATS, and its giant global grab, the world’s largest ever scam.

its a one way street to privatization of everything. Thats “our” real goal in Washington.

What we’re being told is deception after deception.

As long as the real landscape of everything is hidden with such massive deception, everything is backwards. Everything is a lie.

1 Like

What a joke!

The “Affordable” Care Act was designed to PREVENT anything resembling single payer

health care.

The ACA takes tax dollars and funnels them into the pockets of Private Insurance Companies.

It reinforces private controls over access to health care and it reinforces the structure

which limits what kind of health care coverage you can access by how much money

you have. If you are rich, it provides more options. It is based on the idea that rich

people are more deserving and that poorer people are less deserving.

Equating support for the ACA with single payer is wilful ignorance.


Its actually much worse than that. One of its main goals it seems to me is subsidizing the RICH’s health care costs.

The ACA is also only allowed because of an global financial emergency that the WTO GATS itself also caused, and so its time limited, I suspect, because it violates numerous WTO rules . And the time its allowed to continue may be I think limited by a WTO “understanding” we ourselves wrote and forced countries to sign onto, in 1998. I suspect but don’t know exactly why its allowed but that seems the most likely reason. If so, its likely a protectionist measure which is only allowed ten years. My guess from all ive read is their real plan for healthcare is to globalize it so the poor’s insurance will likely come via overseas firms partnerships with US insurance companies, which prevents them from getting rich peoples care, important for preventing lawsuits, when many people have been prevented froi getting tests etc by well organized policies to deny them. Come to think of it a very well connected CA insurer is literally the worst imaginable at that but has been held up as a model for the privatization of healthcare all around the world.

Which would be a real nightmare.

1 Like

The tiers are required so anything condoned by the government cannot be trade distorting. If it allowed people who might be able to buy like services on the market to get helped by the governments when they had committed he relevant services like we have, I dont know but it doesnt seem to me lke thats allowed…
would violate all sorts of rules if it wasn’t already existing before the WTO . If it violates them it loses its ability to be sustainable and has to be eliminated or reduced in scope. Medicare is but it violates all sorts of rules unless its limited only to what are already part of our statutory system of social security, it says, to get atter deal than commercial firms, it would be FTA illegal, you notice that everything is designed not to crowd out any commercial firms.

People who can afford any commercial products who have any means of doing so must buy only them.

likely if not already must eventually buy them. The WTO will probably require we go international with our healthcare so that 3rd world firms are able to benefit from their having signed on to international agreements. Our tax money will help rd world healthcare systems and create 3rd world jobs. This arrangement was one of many such trades that got those countries to endorse our system. So we may be giving up a lot of jobs and once public public services, (practically all of them) but we’ll be getting concessions that lead to higher profits in areas like drug prices, patent terms, also cheaper labor in all sorts of areas. Professional jobs.

Financial services deregulation is very important to the US.

Governments that signed our Understanding add on are getting governments out of financial services, with permitted public services limited to a very few that passed a number of tests. Sme were too good deals to be allowed now, but are still there because they have not been changed at all. Medicare is allowed because its for the retired only, so expanding it does the opposite of what people think. It will make its subsidies which seem to me to trigger mandatory changes like outsourcing in some services, if they are defined as services under the GATS. they may also be confined to the 1998 level of regulation, instead of guaranteed issue like they can be if they are considered “services supplied in the exercise of governmental authority” and exempt.

We are literally fighting a war on public services globally, for corporations and the wealthy.

Also, governments want to shed themselves of moral hazard. I have a lot on my web site on these issues.

1 Like

Nobody in the US has told us the truth. But expanding Medicare beyond social security without leaving GATS first, will reliably, instantly destroy it’s ability to receive subsidies under the WTO commitments we made in financial services. Thats clear as a bell and can be read and verified in seconds on the WTO web site.


If the article were remotely true, he would not have been nominated by Biden.


Pharma isn’t the issue.

Big money campaign contributions are.

1 Like

It takes him out of the running to be a replacement for Harris. I want to know who the twelve people were at that lavish dinner Newsome attended during the quarantine. Billed as a birthday party for a lobbyist, you can bet the senate replacement was the center of discussion. If hobnobbing with a lobbyist is the cover story, what was actually going on? Pass me my tinfoil hat.


Have you ever heard of the TRIPS agreement, its one of the WTO agreements.

It gives Big Phrama everything they want and makes it international law.

Like GATS does with health insurance and other services. It locks in the corporate system forever, barring some huge fuckup like a comet hitting Earth and wiping out almost all life and all corporations, countries, property etc.

The routine about it being corporate money may apply to other things but not to the major things we’ve used trade deals to lock in. But they do want to hide the truth so they still say that.

Thats interesting, thanks.

Becerra is no progressive. He’a corporatist and a cop, and he’s done extraordinary damage to pain management in the United States by acting as one of the spearheads in taking down opiate medicines in the US as a way to cover for the increased distribution of heroin and fentanyl in street drugs. Even then, he had no intention of “bringing pharma to justice”, for those of you who are convinced the opiate “crisis” was a creation of pharmaceutical marketing. He admittedly only wanted to leverage a massive settlement in order to help fill CAs coffers.

He’s defended the ACA to the maximum–and others here have addressed that already quite well–so he has no interest in agitating for single payer anything.

I work with people in HHS as part of my own “job”, While Becerra admittedly has some passable background in human services, on the health front, he’s likely going to be a corporate disaster Hopefully our allies in HHS can find ways to reach this man before we lose another 50k of our people this coming year.

I will say this for Biden: His CDC pick may wind up being a dramatic improvement over the last few, and so far, that appears to be his best potential appointment by far. And the CDC needs all the help it can get to restore its former luster.

1 Like

If this were true, Biden has said he would veto MD4A if it came across his desk.
What difference does this appointee make.

1 Like

Biden needs to follow this article 21 procedure now to prevent disaster happening to Medicare, which seems to me (no expert, not even one playing on TV) has to be limited to those in social security already, otherwise the booby trap in the Annex will blow them up for him and wall street if he expands medicare to begin even one second before social security. Or so it looks to me.

What do you think? The text I’m talking about is right at the top.
This looks to me like it may dynamite Medicare, not expand it.


the problem is the ACA’s date. We agreed in 1998 to “stand still” regulations in financial services unless they were existing (as far as I can tell -only those are allowed) on that date. The effective document is the Understanding on Commitments in Financial Services, its on the WTO site under “Legal Texts”

Actually, reading the House hearings from Feb 1994, that does seem to be the meaning from the testimony by the Coalition on Service industries.

Looking at my computer’s clock its December 9, 2020, thats a long long time after February 26, 1998. Does anybody know the effective date of the ACA? It was in 2010 wasnt it?

This is a problem, if the ACA violates it, that means that it may not be allowed to go on violating our promise in the GATS for very long. These deals are supposed to ensure that business investments in the US have certainty.

We need to follow the rules and GTF out of WTO or its guaranteed that the corporations and their two fake parties will keep on screwing us over again and again with these actor hijinks, digging us deeper into their HOLE and stealing our votes all that time.

Our governor’s last name is Newsom. No “e” on the end. Coincidentally, that’s the way the far-right writes it on corporate, local San Francisco websites.

AMEN, unfortunately.   O’Bummer & P’Loser were likewise in position to bring those who had committed War Crimes in Iraq to account, along with the Banksters who brought us the Bush recession.  Nothing happened then, and I do not expect much of anything will happen now.

“wiping out almost all life and all corporations, countries, property etc.”

Id dat bad?