n recent years, major new studies have tried to rehabilitate the presidency of Jimmy Carter, who died on Dec. 29 at age 100. They’ve emphasized a range of underappreciated accomplishments in everything from foreign policy to environmental protection and racial equity. These accounts still acknowledge Carter’s failures but balance them with a longer-term perspective on how his presidency changed the United States and the world. This positive reappraisal, however, hasn’t extended to . This makes sense considering how devastating the battle over health care was to Carter during his presidency. Congress rejected his major health care policy initiatives, and his grudging support for a much more limited national health insurance plan in part spurred Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) to challenge the incumbent Carter from the left in the 1980 Democratic presidential primary. Yet Carter’s health care record deserves a more nuanced evaluation. More than any other modern president, he took on the health care industry, as well as his own allies, by attempting to address the high costs of American health care. And his health care proposals pushed his party toward the policy strategies that eventually produced the landmark Affordable Care Act in 2010. Carter’s willingness to tackle the politically perilous task of offers a template for the kind of leadership and focus needed to address the health care system’s enduring flaws in 2024. Carter entered office at a moment when health care spending was skyrocketing. Between 1970 and January 1977, total national health expenditures had more than doubled, from $74 billion to $152 billion. As a percentage of gross domestic product, health care spending had risen from 6.9% to 8.1%. Much of this increase stemmed from the enactment of Medicare in 1965, with its generous . These formulas not only raised direct costs, but, critically, also allowed hospitals to generate new revenue streams that enabled them both to build capital reserves and take on debt by entering the bond markets. Hospitals in turn used this access to capital to build new facilities, renovate old ones and add sophisticated new equipment. This created a cost spiral as hospitals competed with one another on facilities and technology, rather than affordability. Carter tried to duck the issue of health care policy in the 1976 Democratic primary, but exploding prices, along with continued interest in national health insurance on the left flank of the Democratic Party, made that impossible. After Carter’s victory in the Florida primary in March 1976, the United Automobile Workers (UAW) union demanded that he endorse national health insurance as a condition for receiving its critical endorsement. As an outsider from Georgia, Carter needed the union’s support. So after extended negotiations, he agreed to satisfy the UAW’s demand in an April 1976 speech. Even then, however, Carter refrained from backing Kennedy’s “Health Security Bill”—which offered complete single-payer public health coverage with no cost sharing and no role for private insurers—despite all of his main rivals for the Democratic nomination endorsing it. Instead, he described the general principles of a program that would be introduced in phases. Carter envisioned relying on private as well as public insurance, and his plan included checks on both hospital and physician fees to control costs. Carter also tied his program, in some unspecified way, to reductions to welfare. Since the union wanted to maintain influence if Carter won, this proposal was enough to secure its support. Carter went on to win the nomination and the election in 1976. As the president-elect and his team evaluated their priorities, concerns about the federal budget deficit and rising inflation took precedence over his campaign promise on health insurance. They decided to focus on hospital costs instead. As later put it, they couldn’t “even begin talking about affording a national health insurance program if hospital costs had an unlimited straw into the Federal Treasury.” Kennedy and other supporters of a deferred to the new president—but they were unhappy about it. They agreed about the need to control costs, but believed the two goals could be pursued simultaneously. By April 1977, the Carter team had drafted an innovative, two-part hospital cost containment proposal. The first part capped total hospital revenue growth at nine percent annually, with limited exceptions, achieved through a limit on average revenue per admission. The second part of the Carter bill audaciously proposed limiting total annual hospital capital expenditures to $2.5 billion nationally. This would cut spending for new facilities, and thus was key to slowing the rapid growth of the hospital sector. Together, the two prongs had the potential to be as transformative as Kennedy’s “Health Security Bill” because of the way they challenged unchecked hospital expansion and cost increases. The proposal triggered a brutal war. The industry organized an aggressive local lobbying campaign against the bill while implementing a much-hyped “voluntary effort” to control costs. , Carter’s special assistant for public liaison, explained that every local hospital board included "the president of the bank, the president of whatever local community organizations there were, the leading lights in all the religious organizations in town and so forth.” The hospitals’ powerful allies meant that Carter had lost public opinion, “before we ever got going.” Congress voted down Carter’s proposal multiple times between 1977 and 1979, dealing what he considered to be a crucial blow against his domestic agenda. Meanwhile, a frustrated Kennedy pressed the president to announce a national health insurance plan before the 1978 midterm elections. Carter recognized, however, that Kennedy had no support from moderate and conservative Democrats in Congress and pushed to defer release of a specific plan until the following year. Kennedy grudgingly agreed, but at the midterm Democratic convention that December, he savaged Carter’s inaction. Finally, in June 1979, Carter released a plan for the first phase of a program to achieve universal coverage. It relied on both public and private insurance to cover “catastrophic” medical costs, and it proposed federalizing Medicaid by combining it with Medicare into a new federal program known as “Healthcare.” This would have eliminated the state-to-state variations that made Medicaid an inconsistent and unequal vehicle for insuring low-income Americans. While covering all expenses for the poor, Healthcare had a $1250 deductible ($5151 in 2023 dollars) for higher income recipients. In addition, the Carter plan retained employer-provided private insurance with a mandate that employers offer at least catastrophic coverage for their workers for costs above a deductible of $2500. On the cost control side, the bill limited hospital capital expenditures and added a new system of physician fee controls. More comprehensive coverage, the administration argued, could be added as economic conditions allowed. Kennedy balked at the skimpy benefits, understanding that Congress could not be relied on to regularly expand coverage. Even so, Carter’s vision influenced him. Kennedy’s own proposal began to include public and private elements, including an employer mandate and a requirement that insurance companies provide marketing and administrative services for the plan’s public elements. It also included an annual national health budget to control costs. Neither bill made any real progress in Congress, and Kennedy’s frustrations fueled his decision to challenge Carter for the 1980 Democratic nomination. Despite the political damage done by Carter’s twin defeats on health care, he achieved two major things. First, he recognized the burgeoning cost control problems in the American health care system. His proposal, if passed, would have laid the foundation for a more cost effective and equal system. He understood that such hospital cost containment was a prerequisite for achieving universal coverage. Second, Carter changed the terms of the health care debate for Democrats. No longer would they push universal federally provided insurance like Kennedy’s proposal from the early 1970s had done. Instead, Bill Clinton (unsuccessfully) and eventually Barack Obama in his signature bill in 2010 both embraced a mixture of public and private health insurance that built on Carter’s legacy. Its debatable whether this shift was positive, but it marked a key step toward our current system. The other element of Carter’s health care agenda—the critical but politically perilous problem of high costs—remains largely unaddressed. While President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act took important steps to control the costs of prescription drugs, those only account for nine percent of healthcare costs. Also under Biden, the Federal Trade Commission has increased its scrutiny of both horizontal and vertical hospital mergers, but this has had limited effects and is largely after-the-fact, as the industry has already undergone significant consolidation. Unlike Carter, Biden has not pursued the direct regulation of costs stemming from hospitals, physicians, and clinical services, despite them accounting for 51 percent of health care costs. With cost problems still plaguing Americans in 2023, Carter has proved right on health care. While he couldn’t bend Congress to his will, his hospital spending caps could have prevented many of the challenges we continue to confront. The question now is whether today’s political leaders have the courage to follow his lead. ,Another standout feature of Three-Dimensional Universe is its commitment to innovation. The team behind 3DU is constantly working to improve and enhance the platform, adding new features and functionalities that keep pace with the evolving needs of the industry. By staying ahead of the curve, Three-Dimensional Universe ensures that its users always have access to the latest tools and technologies, enabling them to stay agile and responsive in a fast-paced business environment.
Man accused of duping churchgoers into investing in video Covid-test tech to plead guiltyRawalpindi: A military court in Rawalpindi formally charge-sheeted the former Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Director General retired Lieutenant General Faiz Hameed in May 9 cases and his alleged involvement in political activities in the country. A regular Field Court Martial proceeding has been initiated against the retired general. Hameed was also found involved in violating Official Secret Act. He has been alleged to have tarnish the image and interests of the state. According to the ISPR, Hameed is being granted all legal rights to defend himself.In the fast-paced world of football, clubs are constantly evolving and adjusting their structures to stay competitive. Recent reports from the Sun newspaper have shed light on two Premier League clubs making significant decisions that could impact their future strategies.
Title: Mac Mini Expansion and Upgrading Strategy: Get It Done Easily with ORICO Mini Series
Leading the charge in the star-studded lineup were young sensations Kylian Mbappe and Erling Haaland. Mbappe, the French forward known for his blistering pace and clinical finishing, has been a standout performer for both Paris Saint-Germain and the French national team. Meanwhile, Haaland, the towering Norwegian striker, has captured the world's attention with his incredible goal-scoring exploits for Borussia Dortmund and now, Real Madrid.
Suspect in UnitedHealthcare CEO killing charged with murder in New York, court records showLiu Yuning, known for her captivating performances and stunning beauty, has been gaining popularity for her work in various films and television dramas. However, her recent hospital visit has raised concerns and curiosity among her followers.NBA MVP Watch: Jayson Tatum, Giannis Antetokounmpo Headline Early Rankings Standing at an imposing 7 feet 2 inches, Li Muhao plays as a center for the Xinjiang Flying Tigers. Known for his shot-blocking ability and intimidating presence in the paint, Li has been a key defensive anchor for his team. In the 15th round, he showcased his dominance by controlling the boards and altering opponents' shots with his sheer size and positioning.
Wicked star reveals she first had therapy aged EIGHT after ‘struggling to process’ parents’ divorceSnap-On Inc. stock underperforms Monday when compared to competitors
The National Assembly's resolution to approve Yoon's arrest has sparked widespread protests and demonstrations across the country, with both pro and anti-government groups taking to the streets to express their opinions. The situation has escalated into a tense standoff between those who support the government's actions and those who believe that it is a dangerous sign of authoritarianism and a threat to democracy.In the aftermath of the fire, authorities launched a thorough investigation to determine the cause of the incident and assess the extent of the damage. Questions swirled about the safety protocols in place at the data center and whether adequate measures were in place to prevent such a catastrophic event from occurring.Lastly, incentivizing businesses to create age-diverse recruitment strategies can lead to the creation of more job opportunities suitable for older workers. Employers should be encouraged to actively recruit and retain older employees by offering incentives such as tax breaks, subsidies, or grants. By diversifying their workforce across different age groups, businesses can benefit from a more diverse and experienced workforce, leading to increased productivity and innovation. Moreover, promoting age diversity in the workplace can help challenge ageist stereotypes and create a more inclusive and harmonious work environment for employees of all ages.
BMW set to pull beloved model from US stores in 2025 as automaker halts new orders on stylish car
California to consider requiring mental health warnings on social media sitesSubscribe to our newsletter Privacy Policy Success! Your account was created and you’re signed in. Please visit My Account to verify and manage your account. An account was already registered with this email. Please check your inbox for an authentication link. Support Hyperallergic We’re funded by readers like you! If you value our reviews and news reporting, we need your support more than ever. Please join us as a member today. Already a member? Sign in here. Support Hyperallergic’s independent arts journalism for as little as $8 per month. Become a Member An emaciated man stands alone. He’s naked and in an all-too-white room. The hair on his head has recently been shaved, though his beard is full. The handcuffs shackling his wrists appear oversized for his small frame. A yellow earplug is jammed in only one ear. This photograph is the public’s first, and so far only, look at a War on Terror detainee in a Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) black site: a secret detention center set up to hold and interrogate prisoners who have not been charged with a crime. It’s a surprising image, stark and overexposed, both in terms of how bright the photograph is and how naked the man is. Someone employed by the CIA took this photograph, though we don’t know who. But we do know why it was taken, and who it is in the frame. His name is Ammar al-Baluchi, a detainee at Guantanamo Bay currently facing capital charges for the 9/11 attacks. This photograph, likely from 2004, is from the period before he was transported to the United States’s offshore penal colony in 2006. Baluchi was one of at least 119 Muslim men held incommunicado by the CIA for years in its global network of clandestine black sites, where he and at least 38 others were repeatedly subject to “enhanced interrogation techniques,” a US-government euphemism for torture. Get the latest art news, reviews and opinions from Hyperallergic. Daily Weekly Opportunities From May 2003 to September 2006, Baluchi was secretly shuffled between five black sites, including one in Romania, where this photo is believed to have been taken. (The photo, recently declassified, was provided to me by Baluchi’s lawyers, who added the black band across his midsection to preserve his dignity. I broke the story surrounding the photograph and Baluchi for the Guardian earlier this year.) Whenever any of these Muslim men were moved, CIA protocol dictated that field officers photograph each one, both naked and clothed, “to document his physical condition at the time of transfer.” The image before us isn’t just any photograph. It’s visual evidence of crimes authorized and committed by the United States government, an entry in the annals of self-reported atrocity photography. In all, the CIA took some 14,000 photographs of the agency’s black sites around the world, but we, the public, have never been able to see any of them until now. There are plenty of examples of this macabre genre. Israel produces it . So does Syria’s Bashar al-Assad . As did the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. The Nazis . The Soviets . The French . Governments of different political leanings have contributed to this dark archive, uniting the magical technology of the camera with the awesome power of detention and even death. They take pictures of their own crimes and immediately file them away, in an acrobatic technocratic act of simultaneous remembering and forgetting. The question is why. A photograph, presumably, is meant to be seen. These images, on the other hand, were intended to record but almost never to be viewed. They were certainly never meant to be seen by the public. Of course, anyone who has used their phone camera to take a picture of a receipt knows that a photograph doesn’t have only a public function. It can also operate as a trace of memory and documentation of a transaction. Self-reported atrocity photographs, indeed, fulfill the record-keeping needs of a government bureaucracy. The fact that the CIA was using black sites was revealed to the public in 2005, but it was not until 2015 that the photo archive documenting them was exposed. In response to that revelation, a US government official described the photographs as having been “taken for budgetary reasons to document how money was being spent.” Behold the banality of bureaucratic evil. Photography, since its inception, has subjected Muslim men to coercive violence. In 1850, barely a decade after the invention of photography in 1839, French travel writer Maxime Du Camp sojourned with the novelist Gustave Flaubert through Egypt, Nubia, Palestine, and Syria, taking pictures along the way. On the Nile, Du Camp routinely photographed one of the sailors on his steamer, Hajj Ishmael, usually with the latter draped in just a loin cloth. “He was an extremely handsome Nubian,” Du Camp writes in his travelogue . “I sent him climbing up onto the ruins which I wanted to photograph, and that way, I was able to obtain an exact scale of proportions.” The challenge in early photography, with its long exposure times, was to get your subjects to sit still. Du Camp came up with a solution that he proudly described to his friend, the French poet Théophile Gautier. “I finally arrived at the idea of a rather baroque deception that will make you, dear Théophile, understand something about the gullible naiveté of these poor Arabs,” he wrote. “I told him that the copper pipe of my lens jutting out of the camera was a cannon that would burst into shrapnel if he had the misfortune to move while I was pointing it in his direction, a story which immobilized him completely. Persuaded, Hajj Ishmael did not move for more than a minute.” I suppose there’s a reason why we talk about a “photo shoot.” “To photograph people is to violate them,” Susan Sontag writes in On Photography (1977), “by seeing them as they never see themselves, by having knowledge of them they can never have; it turns people into objects that can be symbolically possessed. Just as the camera is a sublimation of the gun, to photograph someone is sublimated murder — a soft murder, appropriate to a sad, frightened time.” More than any other subgenre, it is self-reported atrocity photography that most closely approximates the murder Sontag describes. During the first two years of Bashar al-Assad’s violent repression of a popular uprising in Syria, a photographer who worked for the military police was assigned the duty of taking pictures of the corpses of civilians the regime killed. The bodies were mostly in military hospitals, often in a severely mutilated state. Initially, each corpse had the person’s name written on it. Eventually, names were replaced with three sets of numbers, the first indicating who the person was, the second pointing to the branch of the intelligence service responsible for the imprisonment, and the third referring to the person’s medical report, stripping them of the final remnants of their humanity. It became immediately clear to the photographer, who is now known by the pseudonym “Caesar,” that these people were being tortured to death. Government higher-ups required his photos as proof that their orders to punish and kill dissidents were being carried out. For two years, he did his work while smuggling copies of over 52,000 of those photos out of the country, before defecting in 2013. His photos have since been displayed around Europe and North America and have been instrumental in proving Assad’s ruthlessness. In Caesar’s photographs, mostly captured with a Nikon Coolpix P50 , the people photographed are already dead. The camera operates as an apparatus of confirmation, the final stage of the government’s killing machine. The Khmer Rouge also systematically documented the atrocities they committed. More than a fifth of the Cambodian population died during its genocidal rule between 1975 and 1979. The Khmer Rouge’s most notorious political prison and torture center Tuol Sleng, also known as S-21, was a converted high school in the middle of Phnom Penh, through which more than 14,000 people were shuttled. Fewer than a dozen survived. Each person was photographed upon entry, many by Nhem En, S-21’s chief photographer, who was only 15 years old when the Khmer Rouge sent him to China to study photography. He returned six months later with a Chinese box camera and began working at S-21. What we see in the photographs of S-21 is the sober reality that those brought and photographed here are marked for death, even though, unlike Caesar’s photos, they are still alive when photographed. By capturing the imminence of their demise, the photographer closes in on killing them, not by knife or bullet but by immortalizing them. Death pervades the frame of the living, which makes a photo of Kong Saman , for example, all the more stunning. A child’s tiny, bony arm and hand extend upward, grabbing the woman’s sleeve. We can’t see the child’s face, but the gesture is enough to remind us of the horrifying fact that young life coexists with mechanized death. In both the Syrian and Khmer Rouge examples, the photographers themselves have been identified. That knowledge, along with the change of venue (from hidden government files to art museum or US Congress) and the political purpose of their display, which serves to prove the brutality of the exhibiting state’s enemies, has radically changed our perception and reception of these images. What was once meant as evidence of efficiency has transformed into proof of brutality. If the photographs previously functioned to label enemies who had been exterminated, they now serve as mementos to identify and remember specific victims. The Tuol Sleng photographs gained particular fame after a 1997 exhibition at New York’s Museum of Modern Art featuring about 20 images from the archive. The Caesar photos have been exhibited widely, from the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum to the European Union Parliament and beyond. But exhibiting the photos in a museum or public hall desensitizes the viewer by making the images feel as if they are fully understood objects, either as historical artifacts or works of art, quite unlike the Baluchi photograph, which remains opaque. None of this extra knowledge is brought to this now 20-year-old photograph of Ammar al-Baluchi. We don’t know who took the picture, and it hasn’t been exhibited in any galleries or political halls of power. All we know is that this is but one of 14,000 photos, that Baluchi was tortured by the CIA, and that no one in the US government has ever been held accountable for the torture program it put into place following the 9/11 attacks. Self-reported atrocity photography, however, transcends government bureaucracy, in the same way that photography is more than simply a visual record. Like all images of its kind, the Baluchi photo records a massive imbalance of power: He is naked before the photographer’s lens and helpless before the machine of the state. Despite this disparity, Baluchi looks straight through the lens with a defiant, wounded, and all-too-human expression. With that gaze, he manages to resist his own soft murder. Despite his shrunken size and condition, he fills the photograph with life and presence. While his body appears defeated, his face looks ready to free himself of the photograph by force of will alone. And that may be the greatest surprise of all. The irony behind this image is that, while it is Baluchi in the frame, it is the nameless photographer, and the apparatus of power behind him, who remain in hiding. We hope you enjoyed this article! Before you keep reading, please consider supporting Hyperallergic ’s journalism during a time when independent, critical reporting is increasingly scarce. Unlike many in the art world, we are not beholden to large corporations or billionaires. Our journalism is funded by readers like you , ensuring integrity and independence in our coverage. We strive to offer trustworthy perspectives on everything from art history to contemporary art. We spotlight artist-led social movements, uncover overlooked stories, and challenge established norms to make art more inclusive and accessible. With your support, we can continue to provide global coverage without the elitism often found in art journalism. If you can, please join us as a member today . Millions rely on Hyperallergic for free, reliable information. By becoming a member, you help keep our journalism free, independent, and accessible to all. Thank you for reading. Share Copied to clipboard Mail Bluesky Threads LinkedIn Facebook5. Inadequate Response to Customer Complaints: Despite receiving numerous complaints from customers about late or missing deliveries, Baron Leopold's responses have been slow and inadequate, further damaging the reputation of the postal service.
In Sunday’s 26-23 overtime win at the Carolina Panthers, Irving piled up 185 scrimmage yards — that’s the most of any rookie in a game this season.
The recently announced finalists for The Game Awards (TGA) Player's Voice category have caused quite a stir within the gaming community. Among the top contenders are three popular gacha mobile games, each accompanied by a downloadable content (DLC) expansion. This unusual selection has sparked widespread dissatisfaction among gamers and industry observers alike.Overall, the Open Day of Yuanwai International High School and the Strategic Cooperation Press Conference with Wisdasmart School was a resounding success. It not only showcased the excellence of both institutions but also highlighted the importance of international collaboration in shaping the future of education. As the event came to a close, attendees left with a sense of hope and enthusiasm for the bright future that lies ahead for all students involved.