Subsidiarity (Catholicism) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Subsidiarity (Catholicism) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

Paul Ryan has referred to his philosophical bent as having more to do with subsidiarity than Ayn Rand.  I consider myself well read, especially about theology, Catholic or other, but I was not familiar with this term, so here is the Wikipedia section on the Catholic take on it:

The principle of subsidiarity was developed by German theologian Oswald von Nell-Breuning.[2] His work influenced the social teaching of Pope Pius XI in Quadragesimo Anno and holds that government should undertake only those initiatives which exceed the capacity of individuals or private groups acting independently. Functions of government, business, and other secular activities should be as local as possible. If a complex function is carried out at a local level just as effectively as on the national level, the local level should be the one to carry out the specified function. The principle is based upon the autonomy and dignity of the human individual, and holds that all other forms of society, from the family to the state and the international order, should be in the service of the human person. Subsidiarity assumes that these human persons are by their nature social beings, and emphasizes the importance of small and intermediate-sized communities or institutions, like the family, the church, labor unions and other voluntary associations, as mediating structures which empower individual action and link the individual to society as a whole. "Positive subsidiarity", which is the ethical imperative for communal, institutional or governmental action to create the social conditions necessary to the full development of the individual, such as the right to work, decent housing, health care, etc., is another important aspect of the subsidiarity principle.

The principle of subsidiarity was first formally developed in the encyclical Rerum Novarum of 1891 by Pope Leo XIII, as an attempt to articulate a middle course between laissez-faire capitalism on the one hand and the various forms of communism, which subordinate the individual to the state, on the other. The principle was further developed in Pope Pius XI's encyclical Quadragesimo Anno of 1931, and Economic Justice for All by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.
“ It is a fundamental principle of social philosophy, fixed and unchangeable, that one should not withdraw from individuals and commit to the community what they can accomplish by their own enterprise and industry. (Pope Pius XI, Quadragesimo Anno, 79) ”

Since its founding by Hilaire Belloc and Gilbert Keith Chesterton, Distributism, a third way economic philosophy based on Catholic Social teaching, upholds the importance of subsidiarity.

The Church's belief in subsidiarity is found in the programs of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, where grassroots community organizing projects are supported to promote economic justice and end the cycle of poverty. These projects directly involve the people they serve in their leadership and decision-making

So, as Inigo Montoya would say, "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." I think we have centuries worth of ample evidence that charity cannot provide health care to nations, that economic justice and ending poverty are not possible through devolved local or institutional efforts. Some things require government, and Paul Ryan and so many others like to pretend that if we just "get out of the way," all of this will take care of itself. Never has, never will.
- Sent using Google Toolbar

Sphere: Related Content

Medical Professionalism Charter Principles | ABIM Foundation

Medical Professionalism Charter Principles | ABIM Foundation:

Principles of the Charter

The principles and responsibilities of medical professionalism must be clearly understood by both the profession and society. The three fundamental principles below are a guide to understanding physicians’ professional responsibilities to individual patients and society as a whole. 1. Primacy of Patient Welfare 2. Patient Autonomy 3.Social Justice

Primacy of Patient Welfare
The principle is based on a dedication to serving the interest of the patient. Altruism contributes to the trust that is central to the physician-patient relationship. Market forces, societal pressures, and administrative exigencies must not compromise this principle.

Patient Autonomy
Physicians must have respect for patient autonomy. Physicians must be honest with their patients and empower them to make informed decisions about their treatment. Patients’ decisions about their care must be paramount, as long as those decisions are in keeping with ethical practice and do not lead to demands for inappropriate care.

Social Justice
The medical profession must promote justice in the health care system, including the fair distribution of health care resources. Physicians should work actively to eliminate discrimination in health care, whether based on race, gender, socioeconomic status, ethnicity, religion, or any other social category.

We talk a lot about professional responsibilities within the medical profession. I think the first two principles of patient welfare and autonomy are uncontroversial (though not always easy!).

The last one, social justice, is just as critical, and I would argue largely uncontroversial around the world both within the medical profession and in societies as a whole. Only in America is this principle questioned, and only in a vocal and politically powerful segment of the population.

I think many physicians, especially our conservative fellow physicians, would be surprised (and disappointed) that every major medical organization in the US (and globally), and almost certainly their own specialty organization, have already endorsed the Charter, warts - social justice in their view - and all!

- Sent using Google Toolbar

Sphere: Related Content

Vatican Reprimands U.S. Nuns Group - NYTimes.com

Vatican Reprimands U.S. Nuns Group - NYTimes.com:

I often credit the nuns who taught me at St. Francis Elementary for the social justice subroutine that was programmed into me, and still runs, continuously. So, way to keep at it, Sisters!

The Vatican’s assessment, issued on Wednesday, said that members of the group, the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, had challenged church teaching on homosexuality and the male-only priesthood, and promoted “radical feminist themes incompatible with the Catholic faith.”

The sisters were also reprimanded for making public statements that “disagree with or challenge the bishops, who are the church’s authentic teachers of faith and morals.” During the debate over the health care overhaul in 2010, American bishops came out in opposition to the health plan, but dozens of sisters, many of whom belong to the Leadership Conference, signed a statement supporting it — support that provided crucial cover for the Obama administration in the battle over health care.

The conference is an umbrella organization of women’s religious communities, and claims 1,500 members who represent 80 percent of the Catholic sisters in the United States. It was formed in 1956 at the Vatican’s request, and answers to the Vatican, said Sister Annmarie Sanders, the group’s communications director.

Word of the Vatican’s action took the group completely by surprise, Sister Sanders said. She said that the group’s leaders were in Rome on Wednesday for what they thought was a routine annual visit to the Vatican when they were informed of the outcome of the investigation, which began in 2008.

“I’m stunned,” said Sister Simone Campbell, executive director of Network, a Catholic social justice lobby founded by sisters. Her group was also cited in the Vatican document, along with the Leadership Conference, for focusing its work too much on poverty and economic injustice, while keeping “silent” on abortion and same-sex marriage.

“I would imagine that it was our health care letter that made them mad,” Sister Campbell said. “We haven’t violated any teaching, we have just been raising questions and interpreting politics.”

- Sent using Google Toolbar

Sphere: Related Content

Medicare to Expand Competitive Bidding on Equipment - NYTimes.com

Medicare to Expand Competitive Bidding on Equipment - NYTimes.com:

Medicare officials estimated that competitive bidding for home medical equipment would save more than $42 billion in the next 10 years — $17 billion for beneficiaries and $25.7 billion for the Medicare program.

Ms. Sebelius said the savings showed the value of the health care overhaul signed into law by President Obama in 2010.

The competitive bidding program was established, with support from many Republicans, under a 2003 law that added a prescription drug benefit to Medicare. In 2008, Congress temporarily delayed the program and terminated supplier contracts that were in effect. The 2010 law expanded the program.

Medicare has historically used a fee schedule to pay suppliers. Officials gave this example of the savings: Under the fee schedule, Medicare would have paid $2,080 for an oxygen concentrator last year, and the beneficiary would have paid 20 percent, or $416. By contrast, with competitive bidding, Medicare paid about $1,395, and the beneficiary paid $279.

- Sent using Google Toolbar

Sphere: Related Content

Off the Charts Blog | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities | “Double-Counting” Canard Quacks Again

Off the Charts Blog | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities | “Double-Counting” Canard Quacks Again:

Former Bush Administration official Charles Blahous has garnered some media attention by gussying up old, discredited arguments about the budgetary effects of health reform. But his paper adds nothing new to the debate.

Blahous claims the Congressional Budget Office’s cost estimate for the health reform law “double-counts” a considerable portion of the law’s Medicare savings. By subtracting these savings, Blahous asserts that — contrary to CBO — health reform increases the deficit.

But there’s no double-counting involved in recognizing that Medicare savings improve the status of both the federal budget and the Medicare trust funds. The outlooks for the budget and for the Medicare trust funds are two different things; some changes in law may affect one and not the other, but other changes affect both.

CBO estimates that health reform will modestly reduce the federal budget deficit. The Medicare actuary says that health reform will extend the solvency of the Hospital Insurance trust fund by eight years.

That’s no different than when a baseball player hits a home run: it adds to his team’s score and also improves his batting average. Neither situation involves double-counting.

CBO has accounted for deficit reduction in exactly the same way in previous Congresses, under both political parties. Until opponents of health reform latched onto the notion, no one accused CBO of faulty accounting.

For example, the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 — both of which Republican Congresses approved — included Medicare savings that were counted as reducing the deficit and improving Medicare’s financial outlook. The Senate Republican Policy Committee rightly claimed credit for this result, and no one made charges of double-counting.

- Sent using Google Toolbar

Sphere: Related Content

Physician Salaries Vary Widely Among Academics

Physician Salaries Vary Widely Among Academics:

Go West, academic urologist. You may earn more than $455,000 annually there, compared to $300,000 in the Midwest.

(If you are an academic dermatologist, the Midwest is the place to be, not the West, if you want optimum income.)

Whatever you do in academic circles, if you seek a very nice, comfortable salary, be a department chair and a specialist. Then again, if you are engaged in academia, it isn't all about the money is it? There's more money in private practice, of course, but we'll get to that later.

There's a wide variation in physician-related academic salaries, often dependent on geography and rank within academic settings, says the Academic Practice Compensation and Production Survey for Faculty and Management of 2012. The Medical Group Management Association report, based on 2011 data, contains information on more than 20,000 faculty physicians and non-physician providers categorized by specialty, and more than 2,000 managers.

- Sent using Google Toolbar

Sphere: Related Content

Down the Insurance Rabbit Hole - NYTimes.com

Down the Insurance Rabbit Hole - NYTimes.com:

Justice Antonin Scalia subsequently expressed skepticism about forcing the young to buy insurance: “When they think they have a substantial risk of incurring high medical bills, they’ll buy insurance, like the rest of us.”

May the justices please meet my sister-in-law. On Feb. 8, she was a healthy 32-year-old, who was seven and a half months pregnant with her first baby. On Feb. 9, she was a quadriplegic, paralyzed from the chest down by a car accident that damaged her spine. Miraculously, the baby, born by emergency C-section, is healthy.

Were the Obama health care reforms already in place, my brother and sister-in-law’s situation — insurance-wise and financially — would be far less dire.

But, if Republicans have their way, even this is in danger, from Matther Yglesias via Slate:

“I’m not concerned with the very poor. We have a safety net there,” Romney told CNN. “If it needs repair, I’ll fix it.”

There's a certain logic to that position. Except that if you read Romney's policy agenda what he appears to think about the social safety net for the poor is that it should be drastically curtailed. He proposes the following five points:

• Immediately cut nonsecurity discretionary spending by 5 percent.
• Reform and restructure Medicaid as block grant to states.
• Align wages and benefits of government workers with market rates.
• Reduce federal workforce by 10 percent via attrition.
• Undertake fundamental restructuring of government programs and services.

In other words he wants to cut the safety net, cut the health care part of the safety net, muck around with the federal workforce, and then cut the non-health care part of the safety net. To further clarify, he states that he "will immediately move to cut spending and cap it at 20 percent of GDP" while increasing defense spending. Which is to say he wants to cut social safety net spending. What's more "as spending comes under control, he will pursue further cuts that would allow caps to be set even lower so as to guarantee future fiscal stability," thus cutting social safety net spending even further.

- Sent using Google Toolbar

Sphere: Related Content