News
HMS Is Facing a Deficit. Under Trump, Some Fear It May Get Worse.
News
Cambridge Police Respond to Three Armed Robberies Over Holiday Weekend
News
What’s Next for Harvard’s Legacy of Slavery Initiative?
News
MassDOT Adds Unpopular Train Layover to Allston I-90 Project in Sudden Reversal
News
Denied Winter Campus Housing, International Students Scramble to Find Alternative Options
The Administration's compulsory health insurance bill "offers close to complete coverage, deals adequately with the crucial problem of expansion of facilities and personnel, and proposes much needed organizational improvement," Seymour E. Harris '20, professor of Economics told a Senate labor subcommittee yesterday.
Harris, representing Americans for Democratic Action, added that "the control rests, moreover, with the public and not with those who sell the services."
"Better"
He claimed that the Administration bill is "much to be preferred" to alternate programs backed by Senators Robert A. Taft (R-Ohio) and Lister Hill (D-Ala.). Both these plans provide for federal grants to states to expand medical and hospital facilities, and to pay for the care of those who cannot afford to pay the medical costs themselves.
Members of both the American Medical and Dental Associations testified yesterday against the health bill. Dr. Louis H. Bauer, a member of the AMA's Board of Trustees assailed the payroll tax insurance plan as "an extreme example of compulsory paternalism, "wrong in principle and impossible of practical operation."
Already Off List
But even before AMA and ADA spokesmen detailed their opposition to the multi-billion dollar federal insurance proposal, Administration leaders had removed it from this session's "must" list. Senate majority leader Scott W. Lucas of Illinois said Monday that Congress could not get around to this matter before a hoped-for adjournment on July 31.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.