Health
OP-ED: Lives Remain In the Balance: 2019
THE AFRO — If President Trump and his Republican allies would seriously consider both their sense of humanity and the lessons of history, they would halt their continuing attacks on the Affordable Care Act (the “ACA” or “ObamaCare”) and work with Democrats to solve the health care challenges that our nation faces.
By Congressman Elijah Cummings
If President Trump and his Republican allies would seriously consider both their sense of humanity and the lessons of history, they would halt their continuing attacks on the Affordable Care Act (the “ACA” or “ObamaCare”) and work with Democrats to solve the health care challenges that our nation faces.
As Congressional Black Caucus Chairwoman Karen Bass of California recently observed, Americans – and, especially, African Americans – will be seriously harmed if the opponents succeed in destroying the ACA.
A humane nation can not allow that carnage – as the lessons of recent history illustrate.
During the current national debate about health care, it is important to recall that, before the ACA, nearly 50 million Americans lacked health insurance<https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/22/health/obamacare-health-insurance-numbers-nchs.html>, and nearly 10 million of these uninsured were African American. Women were charged more than men for the same care, and insurers could drop coverage, deny coverage, or charge 130 million Americans with pre-existing conditions more for their care.
Chairwoman Bass is also correct in concluding that, on balance, the ACA has been a success.
In the neighborhood of 20 million more Americans, including millions of African Americans, now have access to quality affordable healthcare. Children can remain on their parents’ insurance until the age of 26 – and, perhaps most important of all, health insurance companies can no longer drop or deny care due to a pre-existing condition.
This is not to say, however, that we have solved all the obstacles to assuring that Americans can afford the health care that we all need and deserve. We have yet to adequately control price-gouging in the cost of our prescription drugs – and insurance premiums continue to rise at an unacceptable rate.
My colleagues and I have advanced legislation that would reduce the price-gauging by BIG PHARMA – and reforms are possible that would moderate premium increases.
For example, in my State of Maryland, insurers who originally sought premium increases for 2019 have decreased their premiums because of a state “reinsurance” plan that helps the insurers cover unusually expensive health care claims.
The President and his Republican allies should take note. If they would consider these reforms in the context of the history of this national debate, they would recall that two major forces catalyzed the health care reform process more than a decade ago.
First, even before President Obama and congressional Democrats began the process that resulted in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the National Institute of Medicine concluded that more than 18,000 Americans were dying prematurely every year because they lacked health insurance, while research from Harvard estimated the number of premature deaths at 55,000.
That avoidable annual death toll was and remains an unacceptable human cost, challenging our basic humanity as a civilized people.
History also reminds us that a second motivation for reform was the accelerating increase in healthcare costs that threatened the budgets of governments, businesses and individual households alike.
The private, largely for-profit insurance system in this country was failing to fully address these challenges a decade ago – and it continues to fail these tests today.
These considerations are why the President and Congress alike must provide the American People with the answer to a fundamental question.
Why should we continue to provide massive public subsidies to a failed system of healthcare financing when it could be more cost-effective and rational to fund healthcare for everyone in the same manner that we already fund health care for our elderly, disabled, veterans, and poor?
The answer to this question is why some of us believed a decade ago (and continue to believe today) that a single-payer system based upon expanding Medicare to everyone would be the most effective strategy.
However, as has always been the case, politics remains the art of what is possible, even if the possible is less than ideal.
Establishing access to affordable healthcare as a civil right through the Affordable Care Act was the progress that we could achieve politically back in 2010 – and the ACA remains our first line of defense today.
That is why I have joined more than 120 of my Democratic House colleagues in co-sponsoring The Protecting Pre-Existing Conditions & Making Health Care More Affordable Act of 2019 [H.R. 1884], proposed reform legislation introduced by Energy and Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr., along with Education and Labor Chairman Bobby Scott and Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal.
If enacted, our bill would strengthen protections for people with pre-existing conditions and reverse the Trump Administration’s efforts to sabotage the ACA.
We would make health care more affordable by lowering health insurance premiums for low- and moderate-income Americans by expanding eligibility for premium tax credits beyond 400 percent of the federal poverty line and increasing the size of tax credits for all income brackets.
Finally, following the course charted by Maryland’s Legislature and other states, our legislation would create a national reinsurance program to help cover the costs of consumers with expensive medical conditions, thereby lowering health insurance premiums for everyone.
Lives remain in the balance, and the choice for the President and Congress is clear.
We can do what is both practical and humane to assure affordable health care for everyone – or we will pay for our failure to do so in hemorrhaging budgets and lost American lives. Congressman Elijah Cummings represents Maryland’s 7th Congressional District in the United States House of Representatives.
The opinions on this page are those of the writers and not necessarily those of the AFRO. Send letters to The Afro-American • 1531 S. Edgewood St. Baltimore, MD 21227 or fax to 1-877-570-9297 or e-mail to editor@afro.com.
This article originally appeared in The Afro.
Activism
OPINION: Your Voice and Vote Impact the Quality of Your Health Care
One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.

By Rhonda M. Smith, Special to California Black Media Partners
Shortly after last year’s election, I hopped into a Lyft and struck up a conversation with the driver. As we talked, the topic inevitably turned to politics. He confidently told me that he didn’t vote — not because he supported Donald Trump, but because he didn’t like Kamala Harris’ résumé. When I asked what exactly he didn’t like, he couldn’t specifically articulate his dislike or point to anything specific. In his words, he “just didn’t like her résumé.”
That moment really hit hard for me. As a Black woman, I’ve lived through enough election cycles to recognize how often uncertainty, misinformation, or political apathy keep people from voting, especially Black voters whose voices are historically left out of the conversation and whose health, economic security, and opportunities are directly impacted by the individual elected to office, and the legislative branches and political parties that push forth their agenda.
That conversation with the Lyft driver reflects a troubling surge in fear-driven politics across our country. We’ve seen White House executive orders gut federal programs meant to help our most vulnerable populations and policies that systematically exclude or harm Black and underserved communities.
One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.
Medicaid, called Medi-Cal in California, doesn’t just cover care. It protects individuals and families from medical debt, keeps rural hospitals open, creates jobs, and helps our communities thrive. Simply put; Medicaid is a lifeline for 1 in 5 Black Americans. For many, it’s the only thing standing between them and a medical emergency they can’t afford, especially with the skyrocketing costs of health care. The proposed cuts mean up to 7.2 million Black Americans could lose their healthcare coverage, making it harder for them to receive timely, life-saving care. Cuts to Medicaid would also result in fewer prenatal visits, delayed cancer screenings, unfilled prescriptions, and closures of community clinics. When healthcare is inaccessible or unaffordable, it doesn’t just harm individuals, it weakens entire communities and widens inequities.
The reality is Black Americans already face disproportionately higher rates of poorer health outcomes. Our life expectancy is nearly five years shorter in comparison to White Americans. Black pregnant people are 3.6 times more likely to die during pregnancy or postpartum than their white counterparts.
These policies don’t happen in a vacuum. They are determined by who holds power and who shows up to vote. Showing up amplifies our voices. Taking action and exercising our right to vote is how we express our power.
I urge you to start today. Call your representatives, on both sides of the aisle, and demand they protect Medicaid (Medi-Cal), the Affordable Care Act (Covered CA), and access to food assistance programs, maternal health resources, mental health services, and protect our basic freedoms and human rights. Stay informed, talk to your neighbors and register to vote.
About the Author
Rhonda M. Smith is the Executive Director of the California Black Health Network, a statewide nonprofit dedicated to advancing health equity for all Black Californians.
Activism
OPINION: Supreme Court Case Highlights Clash Between Parental Rights and Progressive Indoctrination
At the center of this controversy are some parents from Montgomery County in Maryland, who assert a fundamental principle: the right to shield their children from exposure to sexual content that is inappropriate for their age, while also steering their moral and ethical upbringing in alignment with their faith. The local school board decided to introduce a curriculum that includes LGBTQ+ themes — often embracing controversial discussions of human sexuality and gender identity.

By Craig J. DeLuz, Special to California Black Media Partners
In America’s schools, the tension between parental rights and learning curricula has created a contentious battlefield.
In this debate, it is essential to recognize that parents are, first and foremost, their children’s primary educators. When they send their children to school — public or private — they do not surrender their rights or responsibilities. Yet, the education establishment has been increasingly encroaching on this vital paradigm.
A case recently argued before the Supreme Court regarding Maryland parents’ rights to opt out of lessons that infringe upon their religious beliefs epitomizes this growing conflict. This case, Mahmoud v. Taylor, is not simply about retreating from progressive educational mandates. It is fundamentally a defense of First Amendment rights, a defense of parents’ rights to be parents.
At the center of this controversy are some parents from Montgomery County in Maryland, who assert a fundamental principle: the right to shield their children from exposure to sexual content that is inappropriate for their age, while also steering their moral and ethical upbringing in alignment with their faith. The local school board decided to introduce a curriculum that includes LGBTQ+ themes, often embracing controversial discussions of human sexuality and gender identity. The parents argue that the subject matter is age-inappropriate, and the school board does not give parents the option to withdraw their children when those lessons are taught.
This case raises profound questions about the role of public education in a democratic society. In their fervent quest for inclusivity, some educators seem to have overlooked an essential truth: that the promotion of inclusivity should never infringe upon parental rights and the deeply held convictions that guide families of different faith backgrounds.
This matter goes well beyond mere exposure. It veers into indoctrination when children are repeatedly confronted with concepts that clash with their family values.
“I don’t think anybody can read that and say: well, this is just telling children that there are occasions when men marry other men,” noted Justice Samuel Alito. “It has a clear moral message, and it may be a good message. It’s just a message that a lot of religious people disagree with.”
Justice Amy Coney Barrett raised a crucial point, noting that it is one thing to merely expose students to diverse ideas; it is quite another to present certain viewpoints as indisputable truths. By framing an ideology with the certainty of “this is the right view of the world,” educators risk indoctrination rather than enlightenment. This distinction is not merely academic; it speaks to the very essence of cultivating a truly informed citizenry.
Even Justice Elena Kagan expressed concern regarding the exposure of young children to certain materials in Montgomery County.
“I, too, was struck by these young kids’ picture books and, on matters concerning sexuality, I suspect there are a lot of non-religious parents who weren’t all that thrilled about this,” she said.
Justice John Roberts aptly questioned the practicality of expecting young children to compartmentalize their beliefs in the classroom.
“It is unreasonable to expect five-year-olds, still forming their worldviews, to reconcile lessons that conflict fundamentally with the teachings they receive at home,” he said.
As was noted in my previous commentary, “The Hidden Truth In The Battle Over Books In American Schools”, what lies at the heart of these debates is a moral disconnect between the values held by the majority of Americans and those promoted by the educational establishment. While the majority rightly argue that material containing controversial content of a sexual nature should have no place in our children’s classrooms, the education establishment continues to tout the necessity of exposing children to such content under the guise of inclusivity. This disregards the legitimate values held by the wider community.
Highlighted in this case that is before the Supreme Court is a crucial truth: parents must resolutely maintain their right to direct their children’s education, according to their values. This struggle is not simply a skirmish; it reflects a broader movement aimed at reshaping education by privileging a state-sanctioned narrative while marginalizing dissenting voices.
It is imperative that we assert, without hesitation, that parents are — and must remain — the primary educators of their children.
When parents enroll a child in a school, it should in no way be interpreted as a relinquishment of parental authority or the moral guidance essential to their upbringing. We must stand firm in defending parental rights against the encroaching ideologies of the education establishment.
About the Author
Craig J. DeLuz has almost 30 years of experience in public policy and advocacy. He has served as a member of The Robla School District Board of Trustees for over 20 years. He also currently hosts a daily news and commentary show called “The RUNDOWN.” You can follow him on X at @CraigDeLuz.
Activism
California Observes Third Annual Black Health Advocacy Week
On May 4, 2023, the California Assembly unanimously passed ACR 53, enacting BHEAW every first week of May. “The life expectancy at birth for Black Californians is 76.2 years of age, which is five years shorter than the state average and the lowest life expectancy of all racial and ethnic groups in California,” said Weber in a statement.

By Bo Tefu, California Black Media
California’s third annual Black Health Equity Advocacy Week (BHEAW), observed from May 5-9, reaffirmed the commitment of the state and advocates to address systemic health disparities affecting Black communities.
Assemblymember Akilah Weber (D-San Diego), who is a medical doctor and chair of the California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC), authored the resolution that created BHEAW — the first statewide initiative of its kind focused on advancing Black health equity.
On May 4, 2023, the California Assembly unanimously passed ACR 53, enacting BHEAW every first week of May.
“The life expectancy at birth for Black Californians is 76.2 years of age, which is five years shorter than the state average and the lowest life expectancy of all racial and ethnic groups in California,” said Weber in a statement.
“This disparity is a stark reminder of the systemic and institutional factors that contribute to health inequities in communities of color,” she added.
The California Black Health Network (CBHN) led this year’s events, combining advocacy, training, and public engagement to amplify the urgency of closing health gaps for Black Californians.
The theme of this year’s observance was “We’ve Got the Power.”
“CBHN is calling on our community to step up, speak out, and get involved. Increasing the participation of Black Californians in policymaking — across the health industry and public sector — is one of the most powerful ways we can drive change and save lives,” reads a message from the organization promoting this year’s BHEAW.
“Policy change is within your power and this week we’re in Sacramento with our Health Equity Advocacy Training (HEAT) Program Cohort 3 to uplift issues impacting our community and advocate to help shape the policies and programs that will improve the health of current and future generations of Black Californians,” the message continued.
Focused on public awareness and information, this year’s BHEAW included a social media campaign, a rally and training program with vital information on medical conditions that have a disproportionate impact on Black Californians, including maternal mortality, mental health, diabetes, cancer and more.
For more information on the resolution or to join the movement, visit CBHN’s official site, www.cablackhealthnetwork.org.
-
Activism3 weeks ago
AI Is Reshaping Black Healthcare: Promise, Peril, and the Push for Improved Results in California
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Barbara Lee Accepts Victory With “Responsibility, Humility and Love”
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Newsom Fights Back as AmeriCorps Shutdown Threatens Vital Services in Black Communities
-
Activism3 weeks ago
ESSAY: Technology and Medicine, a Primary Care Point of View
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Faces Around the Bay: Author Karen Lewis Took the ‘Detour to Straight Street’
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Teachers’ Union Thanks Supt. Johnson-Trammell for Service to Schools and Community
-
Alameda County3 weeks ago
OUSD Supt. Chief Kyla Johnson-Trammell to Step Down on July 1
-
Arts and Culture3 weeks ago
BOOK REVIEW: Love, Rita: An American Story of Sisterhood, Joy, Loss, and Legacy