Gov. Deval Patrick Should Nominate Dr. Atul Gawande As Interim U.S. Senator
Gov. Deval Patrick Should Nominate Dr. Atul Gawande As Interim U.S. Senator
Next week, the Massachusetts state senate is expected to pass legislation giving Gov. Deval Patrick the authority to appoint a temporary successor to the late Sen. Ted Kennedy. The interim appointee would serve until the Jan. 19 special election.
Clearly, whomever Gov. Patrick decides to appoint will have a significant role to play in the health care debate over the coming months. It is for that reason we at the Center for American Progress Action Fund believe that Dr. Atul Gawande would be best choice for the job.
Dr. Gawande is a surgeon at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health and Harvard Medical School, and has written extensively on medicine for The New Yorker. An articulate and eloquent speaker on health matters, Dr. Gawande is a former Rhodes Scholar, a MacArthur Fellow, and unquestionably one of the nation’s leading health policy experts.
President Obama has told his staff that Dr. Gawande’s writings are “required reading” in the White House. Dr. Gawande has written extensively on sustaining health care reform and lowering health care costs over the long term. He previously worked for Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN) and the 1992 Clinton presidential campaign, and he served on Clinton Health Care Task Force.
Gov. Patrick has a unique opportunity to advance and energize the health care debate by giving the Senate a powerful voice for change who understands what’s needed to fix our broken health care system. On the day he would step foot in the Senate, Dr. Gawande would be the most knowledgeable health policy expert in the chamber, an incredible resource for his fellow Senate colleagues, and a champion for reform.
We believe that in the course of the next four months, Dr. Gawande can be an influential voice to deliver health care for all Americans. And then, he can retire honorably and go back to his day job.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Brilliant choice…
September 18th, 2009 at 4:10 pmNot a bad choice. But I’d prefer Barney Frank.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:12 pmDr. Gawande is obviously way too qualified on the health care issue for the Republicans not to blow a few gaskets if he is chosen.
Oh yeah, he’s not a white old man either!! Please nominate him. Pretty please!!!
September 18th, 2009 at 4:14 pmGov. Deval Patrick Should Nominate Dr. Atul Gawande As Interim U.S. Senator
– - But, but, but that name…and that skin color! People like HIM never get anywhere!
September 18th, 2009 at 4:15 pmA one-issue Senator? We have too many of them already — and they all have (R) next to their names…
While Dr. Gawande may be a good choice on health care reform, I’d rather see someone like Ed Markey or Joe Kennedy get the nod here (although Joe K. has that nasty “I love Hugo Chavez” thing working against him at the moment…).
September 18th, 2009 at 4:16 pmNot Barney Frank. Nor any other current elected official. We need all of them right where they are. This is a temporary position.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:18 pmGawande would be the most knowledgeable health policy expert in the chamber, an incredible resource for his fellow Senate colleagues, and a champion for reform.
Which means repubs will throw a hissy fit to get him blocked from appointment. Smart, articulate, and for reform: trifecta for (R) opposition
September 18th, 2009 at 4:18 pmbureaucrap, I think Barney would also make a good choice. Anyone with good knowledge of the health care industry that has not received one red cent from the industry coorporations would be fine with me. Judging from Dr. Gawande’s credentials, I would prefer him than Barney. (Huge Barney Frank fan though)
September 18th, 2009 at 4:19 pmThe Dogfather, I would agree with you about the one-ssue Senator under different circumstances. But this is a very temporary position and we’re not likely to get anything done except healthcare reform by January 19. Picking someone with expertise in this area seems wise to me.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:20 pmAnd the attacks on him from the uptighty racist righties will start right about….
….now.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:20 pmGood point PatrioticLiberalChristian.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:20 pmSounds perfect. Looking forward to learning more about him.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:21 pm(although Joe K. has that nasty “I love Hugo Chavez” thing working against him at the moment…).
Geee. I just went through everything I know about Hugo Chaves, and I cannot think of a single thing that would disqualify an admirer of his from consideration for a position in the US Senate.
Other than as populist, and an avowed socialist, he’s a thorn in the side of US hegemonic plans for the hemisphere. Which is why Bush tried and Obama will try to oust him.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:27 pmDr. Gawande sounds like a good choice. Someone smart who will add some intelligent insight to the health insurance reform debate. Hopefully, Dr. Gawande will put those ‘bamas DeMint and Graham in their place.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:28 pmOnly in a perfect world… More likely to be yet another Kennedy.
http://www.political-buzz.com/
September 18th, 2009 at 4:36 pmI still prefer Dukakis, but Gawande sounds like a solid choice. And a temporary appointment to the seat would definitely bolster him if he decides to run for future office.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:39 pmAlso, Irving Kristol died at age 89.
For as loathsome as the ideology (and son) he fathered, the man had class. Like William Buckley…you could vehemently disagree with either man’s philosophy, but they are far more likable and tactful than the mindless conservative whackjobs their views influenced.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:41 pmClearly, whomever Gov. Patrick decides to appoint will have a significant role to play in the health care debate over the coming months.
I doubt it. Since they’ll be new and interim, they’ll be at the back of the line in terms of shaping or promoting anything. About all they’ll get to do is vote the correct way.
I’d heard previously that they might be considering Dukakis, and he would do just fine. But then again, a lot of people would in that regard. Dukakis would only be useful here because he’d be reliable and wouldn’t have any need to run for the position after the interim period.
This would only be useful to Barney Frank if he wanted to use it as an opportunity to transition over to the Senate. Given the strength of his leadership role in Congress, he’d probably lose more than he gained doing that, though. Which would mean we’d lose out as well.
But your guy looks like a good pick, TP. It sounds like Gawande has a lot of expertise in the area, and aside from voting might get the opportunity to explain some things to some people while he’s at it.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:51 pmtokun librul says: Geee. I just went through everything I know about Hugo Chaves, and I cannot think of a single thing that would disqualify an admirer of his from consideration for a position in the US Senate.
Not disagreeing with you, TL — my point was that if Joe K. were appointed, the wingnuts would paint him as someone who “pals around with socialists” (or dictators, or whatever other bogeyman might be bouncing around their little pea brains at the time…). I was only trying to point out a possible distraction if Joe K. is appointed, at a time when we don’t need to be giving the party that is the Enemy of the People any more things to distract the country with while we’re trying to clean up the mess they left behind…
September 18th, 2009 at 4:52 pmHe brought up LOTS of important issues in the original article–but ALSO some real crap. I sent a letter that the New Yorker did not publish:
Gawande A. Getting There from Here, New Yorker, 1/26/09
The need for a single payer healthcare system in the United States, as reflected in legislation introduced by Rep. Conyers in the form of House bill 676 could not be more stark. Indeed, the disastrous state of healthcare in the United States is adroitly described by Mr. Gawande.
However, his arguments against single payer are based on premises that must be challenged. For example, the notion that any major change will look like China’s “cultural revolution” is unsubstantiated fear mongering. While comparisons to other countries are potentially illustrative, they are hardly prescriptive. Indeed, timid approaches may be far more dangerous and costly.
The notion that “incremental” reform is wiser, because it is more politically pragmatic is no more an argument than suggesting we could never elect a non-white President. The very examples he cites, Medicaid Part “D” and the Massachusetts model are hardly models to emulate; they are failing due to uncontrolled and uncontrollable costs. While arguably better than the current morass, they have failed to take bureaucratic and other costs into account and are collapsing under their own weight.
By contrast, HR 676 will address the very issue that Mr. Gawande ignored: the bureaucracy of insurance companies that costs one of every three dollars spent and swamps physicians, clinics and hospitals in a sea of red tape. It is little wonder that 57 million Americans have difficulty paying their medical bills (and that this is a reason for a significant percentage of household bankruptcies and undoubtedly foreclosures).
Indeed, a single payer approach could go a long way to addressing the current fiscal crisis, rather than, say, handing over more hundreds of billions of our dollars to corrupt financial institutions. A recent study by the California Nurses Association suggested that instituting a single payer system would result in more Americans being hired as have lost their jobs in the past year! (See http://tinyurl.com/8xyd8a.)
HR 676 would provide healthcare for all and include features such as no co-pays, coverage for hospitalizations, diagnostic tests, medications, mental health, dental and vision care. Prices could be negotiated as the VA does (and Medicare Part “D” specifically precludes). It even provides employment for those displaced in the insurance industry!
The economic savings and benefits could be enormous. But more importantly, the horrific suffering faced by the uninsured and underinsured and the concomitant stress would be at an end. Single payer is economically wiser and far more humane.
As a person living with hepatitis C and no insurance, this is not merely academic to me. Nor for the hundreds of people I have worked with over the years. This is a matter of life or death.
September 18th, 2009 at 4:54 pmThis comment has been voted down. Click to read.
This could slightly change the complexion of my club. I’ll consult with my party, we’ll think about it.
September 18th, 2009 at 5:10 pmYou got my vote, but I’m not satisfied the WH really has its heart in real reform!
September 18th, 2009 at 5:10 pmzac, have the republicans made any inroads in either the Mass. House or Senate since the law was changed? Of course it’s political. They obviously have broad sway to do what they want. Mass. is a heavily democratic state.
September 18th, 2009 at 5:13 pmHow about Teresa Heinz (Kerry)? Keep it in the family and it is not permanent. Also Caroline Kennedy – she could move to MA for a while.
September 18th, 2009 at 5:42 pmIf Gawande is appointed to the job, the IQ of the Senate will go up by 20 points.
September 18th, 2009 at 7:22 pmWe don’t need somebody who would be a champion at “PolicySpeak” and “PolicyLists.” (See “The PolicySpeak Disaster for Health Care” by George Lakoff.) In order to win this battle we need our leaders to “activate the progressive values in the many millions of Americans who have some conservative values and some progressive values,” aka “bi-conceptuals.” To do that you have to point fingers at the villains and show the human suffering, as Wendell Potter has done effectively. Lakoff recommends: “The health care failure is an insurance company failure” and “we have to act now to end the suffering and death” as examples that will get into the heads of the bi-conceptual audience. I’m not sure if Dr. Gawande is ready for approaching the fray in this manner. We need more than a policy wonk.
September 18th, 2009 at 8:40 pmI find this fascinating. Somebody actually thinks what is needed in the Senate is someone who understands health care.
Dr. Gawande can be helpful, right where he is, to those in the Senate who genuinely want to get worthwhile health care passed. He can give them all his ideas, and even explain them – even help them draft a bill.
But what’s needed in the Senate – at the moment, and this is only a five month appointment – is someone who’s got the political clout and talent to help get the bill passed. Dr. Gawande will not be listened to by anyone opposed.
The Republicans, of course, will not listen to anyone. But what’s needed here – if such exists – is someone who knows where Max Baucus has buried his skeletons. What’s needed here is a mini interim LBJ. I hope Deval Patrick has someone like that in his arsenal.
September 18th, 2009 at 10:26 pmNO WAY!! Dr. Atul Gawande does not even comprehend why we need a public option. His only focus is on the doctor’s end of how to provide better care for less cost. He does not understand why the Insurance Industry is the problem!
My God – this would be the worst possible choice!
It is Because of Profit Driven Insurance that the U.S. is rated 37th (just below Costa Rica). We have more deaths per 100,000 from treatable diseases than any other westen nation. We spend $3-6000 more per person, 5-12% more per GDP on health care and we still don’t cover 40+ million people! This is insanity!
ALL Western Countries have universal coverage, require non-profit health care whether public or private sector, have a sustainable % of GDP and All have higher rates of survival from treatable disease!
September 18th, 2009 at 11:11 pmWhat the GOP REALLY means … says:, I’ve lived in MA my whole life. Massachusetts has a well earned nickname “Taxachusetts” in large because the Democratic majority believes in increasing taxes and government spending instead of keeping taxes low and being fiscally responsbile. The state could use more Republicans in office so we had a more balanced mix in the state government. Duval Patrick has been horrible so far. He’s spend too much time increasoing taxes and giving overpaid patronage jobs to his cronies. He’ll be a one term governor.
September 18th, 2009 at 11:44 pmDr. Gawande would be a true "triple threat": Not only does he have an M.D. and a Master of Public Health degree, both from Harvard Medical School no less, but he also has a master’s degree in "politics, philosophy, and economics" from Oxford, where he was a Rhodes Scholar.
It is not surprising that when he talks, or writes, about health care reform, people — up to and including the president — listen. Dr. Gawande brings to the issue a uniquely valuable perspective, from both the delivery side, as a physician, and the policy side, with his background in politics and economics.
And with his having mastered philosophy as well, he should be able to "frame" the issues in terms of values, and not just "policyspeak," as George Lakoff has indeed recommended (and as lexrex1215 noted above). I guess that makes Dr. Gawande a "quadruple threat."
I would need to know more about the man — more to the point, the citizens of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts would need to know more about the good doctor — but given his sterling credentials, Dr. Gawande appears to be an excellent candidate for the job.
Although no one can truly fill Teddy’s great shoes.
September 19th, 2009 at 3:37 amzak says:
The Democrats attempts to appoint a temporary fill-in is complete and utter hypocrisy.
That’s an insane statement. It’s not in the least unusual for a Governor to appoint an interim Senator until the next election, regardless of which state you’re talking about or what else is going on. Massachusetts deserves to be represented immediately, period.
The decision is up to the State Legislature, not you. Whatever method they authorize is the law of the land, whether you like it or not.
Regarding Kerry in 2004, it’s not at all unusual for a sitting government offical to run for the Presidency. Typically their replacement (should they win) is in line with someone who would complete their term roughly as they would have.
At present, there is no official “rule” for how an interim Senator gets appointed. Had Kerry won the Presidency, it would have been up to the state Senate to decide the method, just as it is now.
So what are you crying about?
.
Cindy Lugo says:
NO WAY!! Dr. Atul Gawande does not even comprehend why we need a public option.
Thanks for the comment, it spurred me to seek wisdom from the Great Google. I found an Ezra Klein interview that goes into considerable depth.
Ummm OK, but we’re doing this now dude.
.
When it comes right down to it, it doesn’t matter who gets appointed as long as they vote for health care reform in the Senate. Everything else is gravy. And everything after that is up to the voters of Massachusetts.
September 20th, 2009 at 2:55 amWell, if it is a question of choice then Dr. Atul Gawande is the BEST. Hope no further explanation or elaboration is necessary.
September 20th, 2009 at 11:02 amI strongly support Dr Gawande for the interim senator position from Mass. That would be the right eulogy for Ted Kennedy and be a great service to the national discourse especially at this crucial time.
September 21st, 2009 at 3:15 pmElBruce,
Do you live in MA? In 2004 the democratic majority voted a change in the law that prevented Romney from appointing an interim senator in case Kerry was elected president. The democrats didn’t want Romney to appoint an interim republican. Now that we have a vacant seat the democrats want to change the law back to what it was so they can appoint an interim senator of their choosing until the special election to fill the seat. THIS IS FRICKIN BLATANT HYPOCRISY!. BTW, I’m a registered independent voter. Both parties suck so I favor neither.
September 21st, 2009 at 5:00 pmThank you for your sharing.!
September 23rd, 2009 at 6:02 amwho has the experience and prestige as a former governor and presidential nominee. If the doctor is interested in the job he should jump into the special election. Whoever is nominated short-term is not going to run in the special election in January. estetik ameliyatlar
September 24th, 2009 at 9:59 am