Who controls the U.S. Surgeon General’s office?

Posted by:

Let’s have a quiz.  Who is the U.S. Surgeon General?  (a) Vivek Murthy, (b) Boris D. Lushniak, (c) Everett Koop, or (d) none of these people.

The answer is (d), though you should feel good if you selected Boris D. Lushniak, who is the “acting” Surgeon General. Vivek Murthy should be the Surgeon General, but the Senate won’t confirm his appointment. .

Who’s Murthy? The Boston Globe has high praise for him.  He graduated from Harvard College, magna cum laude in 1997 with a degree in biochemical sciences, and then earned a combined medical and business degree from Yale. He works as a hospitalist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston and is regarded as humble and passionate about his work.

Why hasn’t his appointment been confirmed? According to U.S. News & World Report, the answer “is the iron grip the National Rifle Association has on the Republican Party. The NRA objects to Murthy’s nomination because he believes that guns are a public health hazard.”

In a letter to Senate leaders, NRA-Institute for Legislative Action Executive Director Chris W. Cox wrote, “Murthy’s record of political activism in support of radical gun control measures raises significant concerns about the likelihood he would use the office of Surgeon General to further his preexisting campaign against gun ownership.”

Murthy is also a member of Doctors for America which lobbies for gun law changes. According to the Cox, “Murthy urges mandatory licensing “for anyone purchasing guns and ammunition—including mandatory firearm safety training and testing” and “regulations that would place ‘limits on the purchase of ammunition,’ and establish a ‘mandatory waiting period of at least 48 hours.’” In short, Murthy is “radically anti-gun.”

Let’s go back to that idea of a public health issue. What does that mean?  The Institute of Medicine offers this definition: “what society does collectively to assure the conditions for people to be healthy.” You might think that public health concerns only disease, but public health is much more. The Sheldon Margen Public Health Library, University of California, lists tobacco control and lead poisoning as public health issues. The Center for Disease Control says that motor vehicle crashes are a “major public health problem.”

Why not gun violence, questions U.S. News: “It’s pretty obvious to everybody except the NRA die-hards that guns are a clear and present danger since the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports there were 335,609 gun deaths in the U.S. between 2000 and 2010. If that’s not an epidemic, nothing is.”

To look at gun violence as a public health issue means you work backward from a gun death and analyze what could be done to prevent a similar death in the future. Maybe a legal issues needs to be addressed, maybe it’s a matter of education or changing attitudes. The NRA sees any such effort as an imminent threat to gun owners, but I haven’t heard doctors talk about confiscating guns—as if that’s a possibility.

The NRA is entitled to its view, but the real issue is not whether Murthy is “radically anti-gun,” but why the Senate feels compelled to do the NRA’s bidding.  Murthy has the qualifications to do the job. Why should anybody be surprised about his views on guns? He’s a doctor, and doctors get paid to figure out how to decrease mortality rates. Why should guns be excluded?  And besides, how big of a threat can Murthy be to gun owners? As Surgeon General, his role will be limited to advocating for medical and health practices; he’ll have no legislative power.

Then again, maybe we shouldn’t be surprised at the Senate’s timidity at the feet of the NRA. “Most politicians fear talking about guns almost as much as they would being confronted by one.” [1]

Let me change gears here. With Thanksgiving just three days away, I ask you to spend a few moments thinking about the thousands of U.S. service members serving overseas, some of them in very harsh conditions.  Sure, they get paid to do this, but that doesn’t make it any easier to be away from family. If you’re so inclined, remember them in your prayers.

__________________________________________________

Jack D’Aurora writes for considerthisbyjd.com

___________________________________________________

 [1] Arthur Kellermann, MD, formerly of the Center for Disease Control, and former Rep. Jay Dickey, R-Ark, who was once the NRA’s point man, in an op-ed piece they wrote in The Washington Post¸July 2012.

7
  Related Posts

Comments

  1. Dan Hunter  November 24, 2014

    Jack, I like your posts. Keep them coming.

    reply
  2. RMarsh@lanealton.com  November 24, 2014

    EXCELLENT.

    Rick E. Marsh, Esq. Lane, Alton & Horst, LLC

    reply
  3. robin Lorms  November 24, 2014

    Jack:

    You have excellent writing skills. I am impressed!! Robin Lorms Coordinator of Men’s Ministry

    reply
  4. james@hirlty.com  November 24, 2014

    Jack, I think the problem with “Gun Control” is that there are plenty of laws already on the books to control weapons in the hands of criminals. Chicago for example has the toughest gun laws in the nation coupled with the highest incidence of gun violence. The two things are not related. The only people affected by new gun laws like what you seem to endorse are law abiding citizens. They are entitled by the bill of rights to own guns with no restrictions by their elected officials. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration has tried repeatedly to restrict those rights. The NRA opposes the efforts of these people as they should according to “The right to bear Arms”. There must be a potential Surgeon General who is not a radical anti-gun fanatic that could do the job of focusing his attention on modern healthcare matters. We are currently drowning in the colossal failure that is Obamacare. Maybe he could start there and leave the guns to he NRA.

    Thanks!James R. DixonHomes & Investments Realty, LLC

    reply
    • Jack D'Aurora  November 24, 2014

      Jim, thanks for commenting, but i’m puzzled. You refer to “new gun laws like what you seem to endorse,” but I didn’t endorse any gun laws. Best, Jack

      reply
  5. Tony Gugliemotto  November 24, 2014

    Jack,

    Once again you’ve peeled the layers of the onion back far enough for us to see yet another aspect of our do-nothing Congress. How we ever will get beyond pay-to-play partisan gridlock is anyone’s guess. Thanks for keeping us informed.

    reply
  6. Rick Studer  November 24, 2014

    Jack,I’ve been remiss in not telling you sooner that I’m enjoying your more frequent musings.

    reply

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published and your last name is optional.