Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
- The Rise of the New Economy Movement
- Preying on Poverty: How Government and Corporations Use the Poor as Piggy Banks
- The Organic Watergate: Alarming Report Reveals USDA's Cozy Relationship with Corporate Agribusinesses in 'Organics'
- Updated: Under Pressure, TED Releases 'Income Inequality' Talk
- 'Biggest Act of Civil Disobedience in Canadian History'
Popular content
Today's Top News
Why is Single-Payer Health Reform Not Viable?
HELENA, Mont. - When it comes to health care reform in America, there is a relatively simple solution that will cover everyone's basic health care, control costs and save businesses, most people and the country a lot of money.
It's called a single-payer health plan, where the government collects taxes to finance national health insurance. The government, which is the "single payer," covers all citizens and pays the bills when they visit private (or public) doctors, hospitals and other facilities for medical care.
All would have basic coverage, regardless of whether they have a job, or where they work. Nobody gets billed for basic care. No-body goes broke because of medical bills.
Yet this option has been declared "off the table" by Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., who's among those leading the charge for health care reform in America.
Top Democrats who will be deciding policy in America in 2009, including Baucus and President-elect Barack Obama, say single-payer is "not politically feasible," because the public won't strongly support it.
What they really mean is that when it comes to health care reform, they don't want a political fight with some of the nation's most powerful financial interests, which have the resources and the motivation to turn public opinion against meaningful reforms.
These interests include the health insurance industry, pharmaceutical drug companies, some hospitals, highly paid medical specialists, medical suppliers and others who now profit handsomely from our current system - and who could no longer command those profits under a single-payer system or an alternative form of a national health plan.
There's no doubt that it would be a huge political battle to attempt to install a single-payer or other national health system in the United States.
But single-payer is not without its prominent supporters.
HR676, which would create national health insurance and a single-payer system, was introduced last year by Rep. John Conyers Jr., D-Mich. and has 93 co-sponsors in the U.S. House. It has not even had a hearing.
Nearly 500 labor unions from across the country have endorsed the bill, as have AFL-CIO units in 39 states, including Montana. There is a national coalition supporting single-payer, led in part by the California Nurses Association (CNA), which has 85,000 members.
Michael Lightly, director of public policy for CNA, said single-payer is "the most fiscally conservative approach" to health care, because by having one payer/insurer (usually the government), you eliminate the profits of private health insurers, you negotiate bulk purchases of drugs, you negotiate reasonable fees with health care providers and you have global budgets for hospitals and large clinics.
Single-payer or a regimented national plan also is how nearly all other developed countries run health care and cover everyone - and at a lower price than we do, because it's more efficient.
Yet Democratic leaders in Congress, who want to reform health care, say single-payer won't be an option, because it doesn't "poll well."
They cite polls showing that the public thinks single-payer equates with "big government" and taking away what insurance they already have. A majority may like the idea, but that support erodes when asked if they'd pay higher taxes to support it.
This polling is testing the obvious lines of attack that single-payer's political opponents would employ: big government, higher taxes, less choice.
If single-payer is packaged in that context, of course it's a loser. But as any skilled politician knows, if you craft a better message and get it out there, you win.
Higher taxes? Not if single-payer all but eliminates the health insurance premiums that you and your employer currently pay.
Big government? In America, the government is the people, and you tell it what to do. It has to be more responsive than big insurance.
Less choice? With single-payer, no doctors or hospitals are out of the network, because there is no network. It's one system. Everyone gets the same basic care. You might have to wait for specialty care or some tests, but that's not exactly a deal-breaker.
"The only reason it's not on the table is because there is a belief that it's not politically viable," Lightly said. "That is a miscalculation in our view. We believe that a real policy debate means single-payer must be a part of that debate."
Lightly also said that even the mild reforms proposed by Baucus and Obama are going to face a political fight from insurers and other interests.
If you're going to have a fight, why not fight over something worth winning? he asks.
Finally, there's the simple question of morality: In America, an incredibly wealthy country, shouldn't we join the modern world and guarantee basic health care for all, regardless of the ability to pay?
As health care writer T.R. Reid told a Helena audience a week ago, our neighbors are suffering and dying because they don't have decent health coverage.
You don't believe that? Just open a newspaper or walk into your local grocery store. Every week, you're bound to see a flier or advertisement for a fundraiser for someone who's been horribly injured in an accident, or stricken with cancer or other debilitating disease, and can't pay thousands upon thousands of dollars of medical bills.
Under a single-payer system or other national health care plan, that wouldn't happen.
But unless citizens apply the pressure to our political leaders, it won't even be considered.
70 Comments so far
Show AllSo, sneak it in the back door. Allow anyone to obtain Medicare Insurance, regardless of age. Allow Medicare to negotiate drug prices (Medicare already sets fees for everything else). Then when people have the choice they will opt for Medicare (already a single-payer program). The only battle that will develop in Congress is with the lobbyists who try to get Medicare outlawed.
I don't care how you do it, but GET THESE INSURANCE COMPANIES OFF MY BACK!!! They sure charge a lot for doing nothing!
Sorry to report this to you, but the lobbyists already got the U.S. Congress to schedule the outlawing of Medicare --- by scheduling it to become privatized. They successfully started that process in 2003 decision-making, for which the activities will start NEXT year --- 2010.
For more read about the wrong direction.
Please please please communicate to your U.S. Representatives. See the two links below.
Bob Haiducek, Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate,
who advocates getting reminders to follow the schedule.
Here's the Republitards' argument: it's "government-run" healthcare. The government will tell you which doctor you can see and which treatment you can have. On top of that, we'll have to pay higher taxes.
It's like the government-run interstate highways (freeways), the government-run libraries (public libraries), and the government-run retirement system (Social Security). When you take the on-ramp to a freeway there's a guard posted there telling you where you can go, and where you cannot. Librarians tell us which books we can read, and which we cannot. And when you retire and those Social Security checks start coming, the government tells you where to retire and how to spend your benefits.
And, all of these things are paid for with our taxes! Horrors!
Do I even have to mention those government-run traffic lights and stop signs?
Hey, Republitards, you voted for Bush twice! You're pinheads! Now, sit down and shut up!
Excellent post. You're so right, and the touch of sarcasm drives the point home.
So, if we implement single payer (and thus legislate out of existence the entire health insurance industry). What do we do with the several million new unemployed?
Yes, this is one of the things that single-payer will have to address.
There will also be those who will want to keep for their employer-provided health plans - and not pay into the single payer syatem, especially and ironically, union workplaces where the employee contribution is small.
I guess there are a some people who actually buy their own plans, but these are either poor poeple with those awful plans that cover practically nothing - so thay would abandon them, or rich people spending thousands a month, let them keep their plans, but taht will pay any additional taxes too.
There will need to be a phase-in procedure for single payer, but no one should be allowed to totally opt-out. The privately insured will still be required to pay a reduced, but gradually increasing amount into the system - which will eventiually lead them to change over.
of course, we could slash the defense budget and have the funds for single payer with little or no tax increases. But the tens of millions of of new unemployed from all the closed-down "defense" contractors would be even a bigger problem.
Of course, this is all pure fantasy...
---USAn---
nwfisher:they can take some of the jobs needed to fill the newly add-ons to singlepayer. Then we can use others in the various aspects of new Work Projects:make your own list. What do we do with all the other unemployed people? Change that: what should we do with all the other unemployed people? How about: paid schooling? Etc. This is a country full of creative, intelligent people with ideas for solutions. I think Robert Reich, who is not wildly liberal, had lots of ideas about labor and jobs. The best way to end a recession is to have public works programs and other things.
Boo hoo- cry me a river. Health is just one facet of that crooked "industry".
Yeah, because the secretary, the underwriter, the marketing person, the person working from home doing billing, etc... they are all crooks.
You can also throw in the hundreds of millions of dollars of wealth that evaporates from people's 401K plans and stock portfolios as those companies are legislated into bankruptcy.
Can we horse whip them?
Guess what-- the insurance industry doesn't care about their low level employees either. They can't outsource them fast enough. Besides the "entire health insurance industry" is screwing a lot more people than it's helping with their crappy jobs. There will be jobs in the new government-run health insurance system, though not as many, but at least they will be serving the public.
How about putting them to work making solar panels, wind turbines, and repairing America's crumbling infrastructure? There's plenty of work to do that the "free market" is leaving undone.
Picking cotton?
What Democratic Party leaders really mean when they say "single payer doesn't poll well" is that it may impact the contributions they receive from the insurance industry.
The Democrats, AARP and others have limited participation in their debates to candidates who will not support single-payer. They have specifically excluded single-payer advocates Dennis Kucinich and Ralph Nader.
"Single payer doesn't poll well" is a red herring, a canard, a lie if you prefer that term. Many reliable polls have shown repeatedly that about 70% of Americans would prefer a government run health insurance system, and around 55 to 60% say they would prefer it even if it meant higher taxes. Of course it would mean higher taxes, but taxes or insurance premiums, what's the difference, it's all money; and you would certainly get more for your money in a system whose main purpose isn't to deny your claim.
Let congress put it into a bill now. Let's see who votes for it and against it.
It's called showdown in polka..Let them all go on record so we can vote them out
next time they run for office.
To tell us that it does not poll right is repeating the Republican agenda.
When FDR passed Social Security, the good-old-boy republican network labeled it
a communist plot, and they have been trying to destroy it ever since.
Take note, Bush wanted to put Social Security in private hands, "privatize it"
they called it...Can one imagine what would have happened to this agency in
today's stock market? Everything that the Bush Crowd Privatized has failed,
look at Enron..
FYI, it's already been in place as a resolution (bill) to support since early 2003 (six full years) and has recently gone nowhere in terms of increased support, which is why we need to communicate to all U.S. Representatives.
The bill is U.S. House Resolution H.R. 676.
The degree of support after 5 years was at 20%.
The degree of support after 6 years was at 20%.
You can do detailed monitoring of the U.S. Congress support.
-- see the status by individual U.S. Senators and U.S. Representatives
-- see the status by each of the 50 states
-- see the Graphs of Progress
-- see the Voters Guide for the 2010 election so that you can encourage the strong single-payer supporters to run again in 2010
Citizens have all the tools is needed for:
-- what to do for the current progress (the 2 links in my signature block below).
-- how to help the future progress towards more single-payer support in the U.S. House and U.S. Senate, at least where there are people to encourage to run again.
Bob Haiducek, Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate,
who advocates getting reminders to follow the schedule.
If people could feel the pain of the elderly or the sick or the people who die every day because of our broken healthcare system they would demand single payer.
It's really simple: "I CARE ABOUT YOUR HEALTH CARE"
v:nicely said.
It is possible to utilize the single-payer program. If counties and states can create and utilize medical facilities for non-insured, low-income, no income patients, it shouldn't be that hard to do it on a federal level. There has to be a merge of the "shady health-care lobbyists money over lives attitude" and the basic need to mend the masses.
Law Student
Alright, I am trying to maintain my composure here but, has anyone seen Michael Moore's "Sicko"? If you have not seen it, SEE IT!
What the government is afraid of fighting is BIG INSURANCE. Just like BIG OIL, insurance companies have a stronghold on policy in this country and the very unfortunate thing is the policy is on People's Health. The un-insured, the under-insured, the un-insurable are always getting hit hard!
This system works in other Countries, France, England, Switzerland and Cuba just to mention a few and works well. It works for the patients and it works for the Physicians. Everyone benefits!
Not everyone. Pity the poor health insurance and pharmaceutical companies. They've got a very good thing going and we have to protect them AT ALL COSTS!
The persistence of the circular, self-reinforcing argument that single-payer health care is "presently" unrealistic in the US because We the People aren't ready to accept it is maddening and exasperating beyond belief.
I lost considerable respect for Paul Krugman a while back when I discovered that he blandly subscribes to this "pragmatic" view. In fact, it's a good example of why I remain highly skeptical and suspicious of the renewed enthusiasm for "pragmatism" and "realistic" politics that's become all the rage since the Erection. It's all very well to observe that politics is "the art of the possible", as if that doesn't beg the question of who exactly decides what's "possible"-- "possibility" is ultimately in the eye of the beholder.
And while I agree that the rapid evaporation of the corporate insurance industry would generate turmoil in the labor market and result in massive unemployment, I can't accept this as a justification to maintain the status quo, including long-range transitional approaches designed to promote corporate health at the expense of the physical and mental health of the population at large.
I mean, was it Received Wisdom to caution against Jonas Salk developing a polio vaccine because it would devastate the iron lung and prosthetics industry?
· Yr Obd't Servant
Brilliant work! I'll be borrowing your Jonas Salk/iron lung analogy. Thank you.
"Just think of the massive layoffs in the iron lung industry! Boohoo!"
As our economy fails and our markets tumble at least one reason is that our companies no longer provide quality service at reasonable prices. They are proped up by false values to provide more profits. When that is changed we will begin to be prosperous again.
Single payer insurance is the only way to rid ourselves of unacceptable overhead for health care. There is no reason to have insurance companies when you have total health care nor is there any reason to pay more for drugs than any country in the Western world. Our costs of research need to be shared by all the people who purchase drugs no matter what country they live in.
If we can't control these costs we can not be competitive in the world economy. It is fair to ask what employees of insurance companies would do. Most will have no trouble being clerks for other companies as the economy grows. Most have no special skills - just the ability to collect money and deny coverage. The ones that have real value will be readily accepted in the health fields.
But the real reason for single payer is not financial -- it is moral. If the richest country can't provide health care to all its people, is the country really Christian (or any other religion). How do these people go to church knowing that they could provide basic health care for everyone at lower costs and better care? How do they ignore the sufferring of so many? How do they ignore the suffering of their parents and their children?
Chuck Drinnan
The answer to the article's question is:
The health industries will not tolerate dissent from their desired policies on the part of Congress or the Senate. They will search and find some stuffed shirt willing to vote their way and finance him or her into public office. When the electorate becomes as intolerant as the for-profit health inudstries of those who vote against their interests, single-payer coverage for all will happen.
Poet
Excellent, Poet! You've got it the basis for the two links in my signature block! ... THEN (that is, when your comments are fulfilled AND citizens decide to TAKE ACTION), AND ONLY THEN, WILL THE FOLLOWING HAPPEN
BASIS: an overwhelming power of citizens via thousands of constituents communicating monthly to a U.S. Representative will most likely result in that Representative’s positive response … or may result in their losing the next election because they failed to positively respond.
Bob Haiducek, Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate,
who advocates getting reminders to follow the schedule.
I think all this waiting around for single payer is a good thing. It prepares people for the long lines they will encounter if we ever get stuck with "single-payer".
Long lines? I have already had to wait three months to get in to the last two doctors I've had. I'm already used to it. So bring on single-payer.
Have you ever been to doctors in Canada? I have. They have public-run health insurance and they don't have long lines and their waiting lists for operations are comparable to ours. The myth that Canadians have long waits is promulgated by a few right wing anti-single-payer free market fundamentalist types. You can find examples of people in Canada who have had long waits for operations, but what they do is generalize those into the norm. In short, it's a lie. You can find similar stories in the U.S., plus a lot more stories of people who could never get the operation at all because they have no money, or no insurance, or get their claim denied. Stories of people in countries with government health insurance getting poor service are a bunch of hot air meant to confuse people. We can do at least as well as France, Britain, Canada, and Germany, don't you think? Maybe better?
39 of the 50 state AFL-CIO's have endorsed HR676, single-payer government run health insurance, or Medicare for All. These are real people with working-class interests at heart, not corporate apologists. They are not stupid.
Yep. Lived there for 4.5 years, and I have spoken to Canadian friends and acquaintances about their health care since I lived there (which was 1988-1993). It's just fine.
However, sometimes the government officials (the politicans, that is) adjust the budget and cause problems. (Example: Canadian wait times had to come back down after the politicians messed up the financing in the late 1980's. And I just read today that the French politicians have messed up; sorry, I haven't researched it completely yet.) After we get the U.S. Reps support (via the 2 links below), which will help get the U.S. Senate and U.S. President support and get the necessary discussion going, then we will still need to have enough of us paying attention to help ensure that there is a public agency that is set up that is NOT influenced by the day-to-day decision-making of the federal politicians (translation: lobbyists) nor any of the state politicians (translation: lobbyists).
Bob Haiducek, Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate,
who advocates getting reminders to follow the schedule.
I've had to wait all day in an emergency ward lobby to get my 94 year old aunt in a wheel chair admited. We finally gave up and took her home. We called and called her primary physician, but he wouldn't see her. She was a very fit and healthy woman and four months later she was dead (never having seen her doctor). A similar nightmare happened with my father who died of brain cancer. His doctor kept canceling appointemnts and it was six months after we noticed someting wrong that my father was able to see him. By then it was too late. I had to wait until I got onto medicare before I could get treated for COPD and by then it was pretty advanced. My co-pays were outrageous, and now I only see my doctor when I'm in very dire straights. My mother has Blue Cross from my father's civil service retirement plan, and it's very good health insurance as such things go. But it's still a nightmare, and the doctor doesn't see her for more than a few minutes at a time. The last time she was in the hospital for pneumonia she got a very bad bed sore because the hospital (one of the best in Tucson) was understaffed.
I'd love to know where you are coming from, Joe Hope. To me you sound like an idiot.
Long lines? I had to wait five weeks just to get in for a check-up at a clinic, the clinic system is so overloaded. But a long line is better than a locked door for someone who has a medical condition they needed treated. Currently at least 30,000 people die in the US yearly for lack of health care coverage.
Employer proxied private health insurance is the horse's ass from hell.
And everyone knows it. Hwedoneedno steenkin poll.
So that's what a brain fart looks like!
For the emotionally stunted among us, having to wait in a long line for any kind of basic health care is much preferable to not being able to afford to get in that line at all. This needs to happen folks. The only ones fighting the idea of single-payer health care are ultra-conservative misers, slimy politicians who continually worry about re-election and the feloniously-greedy insurance, pharmaceutical and medical industries.
It's so obvious that only morons and those making a huge buck refute it. The majority of people I talk to are all for a single-payer healthcare system. The wealthy could still have their pet doctor(s) on retainer. The rest of us could give a huge sigh of relief and stop worrying about having our futures snatched by huge greedy corporations. That politicians (even Obama) back away from it shows the enormous power of these greedy corporations. I personally feel that only armed revolution will be able to overthrow this power, but I would loved to be proved wrong.
Please help me prove you are wrong. You are an obvious supporter, and all I need is for you to take ONE action to ONE person (your U.S. Representative) the first half of EACH month. Thanks in advance; links are in my signature block.
Bob Haiducek, Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate,
who advocates getting reminders to follow the schedule.
I have experienced single-payer in UK and Germany and the only difference from my rather good health care here in Rochester NY - no copay, less paper work.
Sam Abrams
mas.smarba@gmail.com
I experienced a personal emergency in southern Germany and a family emergency (my 3 year old son) in northern Germany. A relative of my wife experienced a personal emergency in England. No medical bills. For the last case of my wife's relative (a resident of New York) he was tested all day from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. He wanted to learn where he should pay. The doctor said "You don't understand, sir. You don't pay, I pay."
In other words, everyone in the country pays and everyone benefits. In the U.S. where everyone pays dearly (250% more than the average of other industrialized countries) but not everyone benefits and the health outcomes are poor (now dropped to 30th in life expectancy in the world) and the financial and emotional stress is extreme (bankruptcies, divorces, suicides, lost businesses, lost jobs). An that is just skimming the surface.
Bob Haiducek, Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate,
who advocates getting reminders to follow the schedule.
I grew up in the aftermath of the Second World War in a time of great promise and great peril. The country honored the young men and women who served and gave them the “GI Bill” that provided access to education that many would not have been able to get otherwise. It provided a way to recover from the sacrifice that had taken too many of their best and brightest.
Perhaps the promise of peace in our time was now possible. The United Nations was established with lessons learned from the League of Nations. An international tribunal was established to subject the war criminals to punishment for violation of human rights. A declaration of Human Rights was drafted in 1947 and signed in full or in part by the nations. The United State did not sign the section recognizing Health care as a human right.
With two terrible wars an economic collapse and sixty or more small wars behind us the dangers of settling disputes violently should have been clear to all.
The belief that we can divide the world into “we” and “they,” that we are good and they are bad, that it is our moral obligation to destroy the bad, by whatever means necessary has its genesis in the “fourth century Christian heresy” known as “Manichaeism.” Economically “we” are in competition with “them.” Politically, ideologically and militarily “we” must achieve victory over “them.” And the corollary that the “ends justify the means.”
It is so engrained that few even recognize the source or the consequences of what they take to be self evident. This heresy justifies the most horrific of policies. Good people have no idea of the blindness that this thinking creates. It is a blindness that extends to all areas of public life.
It is hard to accept that we should do something in the common good, if we accept the division of us into us and them. “I would love to have universal health care as long as we didn't have to support them,” is the refrain that I have heard over and over in one form or another. This thinking is blind to the fact that those countries that have universal health care spend much less and have better outcomes than our insurance based employer paid health care affords.
We were faced with an important election, an election to set the course for years to come.
John McCain does not understand the blindness. He is part of the problem. Sarah Palin is blind. Her ignorance is manifest.
Barack Obama is the better choice. His intelligence and his background are indicative that he understands more than we have seen. I belive that he will be a great president. I have talked with Joe Biden and he has wisdom that we need.
Universal health care must be extended to the people of the United States and to all people who do not now have it. It is a universal human right recognized around the world. The United States is the only developed nation that does not afford it to its people.
Progress in science and industry in my lifetime should have been used to provide for the basic needs of all human beings. That was the promise of my generation, but the peril was that the majority of that wealth was dedicated to war and destruction. Global warming is a price that we will pay for the folly of our heretical persuasions.
The economic and political temperature has risen to a state of flux. It presents great opportunity and great peril. The vote on November 4th is an indication of which way we are turning.
The urgency and frustration is in how to communicate what we have learned to those who could benefit but are blind to the promise.
Excellent set of comments.
It sounds like you know a lot about non-profit single-payer national health insurance and strongly support it.
It is not clear if you know about the failure of Obama to support what we need ... and the associated Obama requirement, promise, and specific suggestion ... of which he communicated all of this in April 2007. If you get reminders and follow the schedule (below) you will then be communicating with your U.S. Representative about this critical need. And you will be helping to fulfil the Obama requirement and helping to realize his promise to us.
Bob Haiducek, Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate,
who advocates getting reminders to follow the schedule.
Just think what single payer healthcare could do for the auto industry. This alone could reduce the cost of a new car by about two thousand dollars. This will help save Detroit!
This obvious fact illustrates perfectly that the Democrats no longer represent middle-class people.
This is the PERFECT OPPORTUNITY for the Democrats to do some Naomi Klein Shock Doctrine tactics and use the auto crisis to push HR 676 through.
But they have no interest in doing so.
Democrats' loyalty is to the insurance companies, not 50 million suffering Americans.
Their inaction speaks a thousand words.
Absolutely correct.
They need demonstrate that they care about real people.
In the meantime we ALSO need to demonstrate that WE care enough to get THEM to care.
Do we care about America? Do we care about each other? Our inaction speaks a thousand words.
Bob Haiducek, Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate,
who advocates getting reminders to follow the schedule.
I'm barely computer literate. Could somebody give me a list of people/agencies to voice my approval to?
1-800-828-0498
White House Operator.
Free Call.
Ask her to connect you to any Senator or Congressperson.
Call a hundred times a day, every day.
Put the number in all your outgoing email and post it on every internet site you visit.
Kapeesh?
Thanks for asking this question. Please consider the following information and suggestion(s).
This is a critical time. Thanks to the actions of the U.S. Congress in 2003, even the non-profit health insurance we have today (Medicare for seniors) will start to disappear in 2010. There is a need to get out the word to citizens that we are getting so close to this critical time of moving from non-profit Medicare (which is already partly privatized!) to a higher degree of privatization. It is time to do positive, proactive steps, of which THE most critical actions are education (about the need to go to NON-profit financing of health care) and communications (to U.S. Representatives) and each of us telling 3 others Or, optionally, tell more citizens if you want to get just a little bit of training and become an activist, which is simply getting a little more background information and helpful tips, followed by helping people to do the three critical actions, primarily within your U.S. Congressional District.
I very strongly encourage you to only communicate to your own U.S. Representative (optionally also add your own U.S. Senators and the U.S. President-elect). Some, perhaps most, of the representatives make it very clear that they either primarily or only listen to their own constituents in their U.S. Congressional District.
The result? You are both efficient and effective ... getting the maximum benefit (a great contribution) for your time and effort.
The website (www.99oh9.org) gives you all the information and the guidance that you need to know for
1) the three basic options of U.S. Mail, e-mail, and phone and how to use them.Go to the Schedule and select the links to write and to call.
2) how to determine all the information for your U.S. Representatives for how to send notes, send e-mails and make phone calls (usually with around 3-4 toll-free numbers in case one of them shuts down, which DOES happen; the government does not set up the toll-free numbers and cannot say how long they will last). This activity is ONE communication to ONE person the first half of EACH month -- to make an EXCELLENT contribution.
3) how to get a short, monthly e-mail reminders for doing the communications on a regular basis, which is what we very much need to do (with the number of citizens growing and growing who are doing the communications)
If you have any questions about using the website to communicate to your U.S. Representative, please Contact me.
Bob Haiducek, Bob the Health and Health Care Advocate,
who advocates getting reminders to follow the schedule.