Abstract
This article, which aims to explore questions relating to SUS at 30 and to dialogue with other studies, presents an overview of the positive drivers, the obstacles and the threats to Brazil's Unified Health System. It points to a lack of prioritizing the SUS on the part of the government, underfunding and attacks on the system made by capital's policies. The article also suggests that one of the most significant threats to SUS is the financialization of health, linked to the financial dominance. It concludes by arguing that the SUS is not consolidated, justifying alliances between democratic, popular and socialist forces, with new strategies, tactics and forms of organization to face up to the power of capital and its representatives in society and in the State.
Highlights
The Democratic-Popular and Hope and Change projects formulated during the democratic transition in Brazil were not privileged by the political forces that had the historic opportunity to occupy the federal government after the promulgation of the Citizen’s Constitution[1]
The lack of priority given to the SUS, and the attacks aimed at dismantling it, were reinforced by the economic crisis, by fiscal austerity policies and, especially, by Constitutional Amendment No 95 (EC-95/2016), which freezes the public budget for twenty years[2]
What are the positive vectors that have sustained the SUS?. Inspired by values such as equality, democracy and emancipation, the SUS is an integral feature of the Brazilian Constitution, ordinary legislation, and technical and administrative norms
Summary
The Democratic-Popular and Hope and Change projects formulated during the democratic transition in Brazil were not privileged by the political forces that had the historic opportunity to occupy the federal government after the promulgation of the Citizen’s Constitution[1]. The lack of priority given to the SUS, and the attacks aimed at dismantling it, were reinforced by the economic crisis, by fiscal austerity policies and, especially, by Constitutional Amendment No 95 (EC-95/2016), which freezes the public budget for twenty years[2]. Recent studies[3,4,5] have indicated more complex phenomena in the area of health than mere analyses of conjuncture can highlight, and they raise the following questions: a) what are the positive vectors that have sustained the SUS?; b) what have been the obstacles and threats to the SUS?; c) what are the alternatives?; d) how is it possible to broaden the basis of social and political support?; e) will the SUS end?; f) what strategies and tactics can be used to consolidate the SUS?. The aim of this article is to dialogue with some of the studies and questions regarding the SUS on its thirtieth anniversary
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
