Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiDoctor's Orders: Health Coverage for Everyone
An agenda that puts people first: Health Care
You wouldn't know it from the candidates' debates or reports on the major television networks, but a majority of Americans favor a government-run health insurance system similar to Canada's.
Those lining up to support single-payer health care include medical professionals, business people, and many Republicans. Dr. Rocky White has been all of those things.
White is a former Republican, from a conservative, evangelical background, who got interested in health care reform nine years ago when his own medical practice slipped into the red. His research into the health care system led him to conclude that the problem wasn't just in his practice- the health care system itself is broken, and a single-payer program is the most efficient way to fix it.
Under the single-payer system, doctors' offices and hospitals remain private for-profit or non-profit institutions. But the federal government covers the bills for patient services, with funds coming from taxes. The patient gets the health care they need. Paperwork and billing are kept to a minimum. Employers no longer have the difficult task of choosing, administering, and paying for health insurance for employees. Everyone is covered.
The current setup is as complicated as single-payer is simple. Today, the discerning consumer must wade through a complex system of pre-existing condition exemptions, co-pays, and deductibles-if they have coverage at all. Arguments over billing among doctors' offices, insurance companies, patients, and their lawyers eat up millions of dollars. An estimated $25 out of each $100 spent goes to paperwork, profits, and executive pay and bonuses. And disagreement over medical coverage is one of the most common sources of labor disputes for employers who have seen insurance premiums double since 2000.
With these inflated costs, it's little wonder that in 2006, the last year for which government figures are available, 47 million Americans had no insurance at all, including 8.7 million children, or that 68 percent of bankruptcies in the U.S. come as a direct result of medical expenses among people who do have insurance.
When White learned about Physicians for a National Health Program and their plan for a single-payer health care system, he saw it was similar to his own idea and he joined their effort.Other medical professionals have had a similar reaction. The American College of Physicians-the largest organization of medical specialists in the country-endorses single-payer health care as does the California Nurses Association, the largest organization of registered nurses.
And so do 55 percent of Americans, according to a CBS News poll conducted in September. In another poll, 64 percent said they would be willing to pay higher taxes for a national health care insurance program.
In Congress, HR 676, the "Medicare for All" bill introduced by Representative John Conyers, Jr. of Michigan, currently has 90 co-sponsors-more than any other health care reform proposal-and the endorsement of the U.S. Conference of Mayors.
Republicans for Single-Payer Support for single-payer health care is not just strong among progressives. George Swan, for instance, is a health care administrator, self-described "Purple Republican," and a founder of Republicans for Single Payer.
"It's about being American and doing what's right," Swan says. "What's right is not paying a 30 percent premium to the insurance system and receiving sub-standard health care."
Business owners are also supporting single-payer health care. For 25 years, Jack Lohman owned a company that provided cardiac monitoring services to hospitals. Today, he's a co-founder of the Business Coalition for Single Payer. A "lifelong Republican," Lohman argues that conservatives should support single-payer because it's pro-business.
"For the same 16 percent of GDP that we are spending on health care in the U.S.," he says, "we could provide first-class health care to 100 percent of the people." And single-payer would "get health care off the backs of corporations so they can be more competitive with products made overseas."
John Arensmeyer spent 12 years running an e-commerce company with 35 employees. Then he founded the Small Business Majority to advocate for the interests of small businesses, particularly on health care issues. Sharp rises in health care costs for small businesses are hurting their ability to survive, Arensmeyer says. "It's antithetical to what we're all about as a country, which is to allow people the freedom to go out and start new enterprises."
Small business has often been portrayed as opposing health care reform, but SBM's research shows that small businesses are interested in being part of the solution-even if it means paying higher taxes.
Walter Maher, former vice-president of public policy at the DaimlerChrysler Corporation, sees the problems in similar ways, although he looks at health care costs through the lens of large corporate employers.
General Motors, he says, is paying people to leave their jobs so they can hire replacements at 50 cents on the dollar with reduced health benefits. "It's sad," he says. "You have a giant albatross around your neck because you choose to provide a good standard of living for your employees."
Money in Politics If the current system is so unpopular among medical professional, patients, and business owners, what's keeping it in place? Most advocates for single-payer agree that money in politics is the greatest obstacle to change. During the 2006 election cycle, the health care industry spent $99.7 million on campaign contributions. Lobbying on health care issues topped $446 million in 2007.
For Jack Lohman, that's the crux of the problem. "Both McCain's and Obama's plans for health care are lousy," he says. "Although both claim they're not taking lobbyist money, somehow this money is getting through. They are each supporting health care that keeps the insurance industry involved."
And all that money can buy a lot of misinformation and scaremongering. Rocky White says he finds that people get interested in the single-payer approach if they understand what's actually being proposed: "When people realize that all that it is," he says, "is a publicly owned insurance company, all of a sudden business people start to lose that fear that ‘Oh my God, we're going to become the Soviet Union.' Even Republicans say, ‘This really makes a lot of sense.'"
While White would like to see reform happen on a national level, he believes it's more realistic to work at the state level for now. And for him, that means Colorado. White sits on the board of Health Care for All Colorado, a nonprofit, volunteer-run group with 250 members that includes Democrats, Republicans, physicians, business people, college professors, and economists. And he is running for a Democratic seat in the state legislature to add "the voice of medicine" to the debate.
"Any time a state has studied it, they find that single-payer is the most cost-effective and covers everyone," White says. His proposal for a single-payer system in Colorado is being studied by a blue ribbon commission created by the Colorado Legislature.
In May, the 6,000 delegates to the Colorado Democratic Party Convention endorsed a pro-single-payer resolution that will be forwarded to the national convention in Denver in August.
If one state can make a single-payer plan work, White believes, it could start a cascading effect similar to what took place in Canada during the 1940s and ‘50s.
"People are discouraged, they're angry, they're upset," White says. "But politics is the process that drives policy, and if we don't get involved in the political process we'll never make a difference."
Daina Saib wrote this article as part of Purple America, the Fall 2008 issue of YES! Magazine. Daina is a former YES! editorial assistant.
153 Comments so far
Show AllEven if we get a one payer system the healthcare system is broken from within. Even if you have insurance coverage it may take months to get an appointment with a primary care provider.
Most people in the US think we have the best of everything. Most do not realize that we are way down on the list in such statistics as infant mortality etc. compared to other industrialized and some nonindustialized countries. Most think we have the right to choose the best doctors and get the most modern and expensive testing just because. Not so.
The medical system has been controlled by special interest groups from day one. The fee scales have been tilted toward specialty care and testing. Gone is the mom and pop local medical office with a caring primary care doc who was available, knowledgeable, ethical and compassionate. Welcome to the nine to five part time practitioner without night call, without hospital privileges, and who must see a large number of patients in very short visits to keep the medical practice viable. When a primary care doc spends 2 hours in the ICU saving a patient's life and gets paid $150, and a surgeon gets paid $2000 for a 20 minute cataract surgery, it is no wonder that we no longer have the best and brightest going into the primary care fields. The offices are often being run by lower cost midlevel practitioners with nowhere near the training of the doctors. It was supposed to be a complementary system of the doctor managing the more complicated cases and working with midlevels who handle the more common day to day patient illnesses. But the docs are fleeing the primary care system, to other fields or retiring. It is not just about personal income either, it has become an overregulated system, with ever increasing overhead, endless paperwork, and tremendous debts to pay off. I still believe that most doctors go into the field as dedicated altruistic individuals, but get torn apart and beaten down by the system now in place.
We need a system to encourage and compensate the use of intellect and meeting day to day patient needs, rather than overcompensating procedural medicine. We need a one payer system with incentives to go into the primary care practices, such as payoffs of medical school tuition debts. We need to keep the field a profession and not just a civil service job. We need to have people involved more in their own medical decision making and promote the use of proven alternative cares. We need to accept that doctors are not gods and not everything can be diagnosed or cured. And we need to die in peace.
We need a system of healthcare for all. We need people to take better care of themselves. We need affordable medicines.
As to the notion of single payer system and nationalization (socialization) of medicine, we need only to look to the model of Medicare which was/is working quite well in this country with significantly less costs and less hassles, than care paid through private for profit insurance companies.
earthbound
While there is little to refute in your post from a factual standpoint your analysis does not got the the root of the problem. That being the US spends $7100 per person per year yet does not manage to provide healthcare for all of it's citizens. That figure is 40% higher than it's nearest rival Canada which has a single payer system.
Your statement that medicine is controlled by "special interest groups" is little more than an attempt at obfuscation and confusion. The largest controlling interest in Healthcare is the Insurance Industry. Their only goal is to maximize profits. Physcian groups and hospital owners who once wielded a great deal of clout have been overwhelmed in the last 20 years have very little influence these days. The AMA which once was a "tight Union" that opposed Medicaid and Medicare is now little more than a spectator. The young doctors involved in the system are disgusted with the way it is run. And groups like the American College of Physcians and Physcian for a National Health Program are on the rise.
Returning to your post the problem with warped priorities with regards to physcian compensation is a direct outcome of the funding system being controlled by insurance companies. Can there be such problems under a Single Payer System ? Possibly but at least with a government controlled single payer system the public will have some accountable agency to direct their grievances. No such mechanism exists in a Private Fee for Service System.
As to the other issues you bring up they are all addressed in a single payer system.
Regarding your closing paragraph be careful in your choice of terms. A Socialized/Nationalized system is a form of Single Payer but not all Single Payer Systems are of the Socialized Model. The Canadian System, that which is advanced by PNHP and HR 676, retains the private delivery mechanism. While Socialized System would be even more cost effective than a Canadian Style Single Payer System the resistance in a number of quarters to such a system realistically precludes its implementation at this time. When you say Socialized Medicine you tap into a great deal of negative conditioning that has been engrained into the public psyche for over a generation. That conditioning may not be rational but it is there nonetheless and we have to deal with it. It is far more productive to stick with the terms Single Payer and Canadian Style Healthcare System and avoid the terms Socialized Medicine, Universal Healthcare and Universal Access. The term Universal leaves the door open for the Insurance Companies to return.
Congressional support for Single Payer is waning at the moment. This stems from the fact that Grassroots Support for Single Payer is growing rapidly. And the congressional proponents of Single Payer are getting nervous about being held to their rhetoric. Grassroots groups supporting Single Payer are springing up like weeds. While public consciousness of health care has risen sharply in the last 3 years public education on the matter remains relatively low. Now that we have an audience with an open mind it is critical to get the message out clearly and succinctly. Ralph Nader in 1994 said it best. "You can only get the people revved up once a decade on these issues."
Right now they are revved up.
Make the most of it.
Again how many elections have you heard this same story? We have to get healthcare. To me it would be the #1 reason to vote for a person, then war.
Then it logically follows that you will be voting for Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney as they are the only two candidates advocating a Single Payer System ?
CORRECTION http://www.pnhp.org (physicians for a national health program)
ardee, That truth has long been known. It could also be that we become what we see, or that we can only see what we are.
this story and so many others show me 100% there is no democracy in America
Again the american media has come to the rescue of the Reb and Den parties and lobbyist on real issues Americans want their leaders to change. I am amazed everytime and this is right out in the open that We the people are never even allowed to ask a real question. I have said it before the US of A is screwed to a point I can't ever seeing it return to something normal that its people come first. The media is not even asking about if both McCain and Obama are even allowed to run for president?
Please don't forget that Dennis Kucinich was not allowed to particpate in the AARP sponsored Democratic Presidential debate because they were terrified he'd talk about not-for-profit single-payer healthcare! Oh the horror!
He was denied particpation in the Nevada debate for that reason too plus his opposition to storing nuclear waste at Yucca Mtn.
Most of the country still knows nothing about Single Payer Healthcare. The subject has been virtually censored in major mass corporate media.
The powers that be have squelched all discussion on the topic because they know the public would overhwhelmingly support it.
And 50 million people suffer.
Kucinich is a Blowhard !
He shows no zero commitment to his ideals when it comes to politics.
He claims to oppose the slaughter in Iraq but back the War Criminal Kerry in the 2004 Election. His resolution to impeach Bush is nothing more than Political Grand Standing !
This year Ralph Nader, a candidate that would vow to implement a Single Payer Healthcare Sysytem, is running for President of the United States. Lets see if Kucinch has the guts to break ranks and support Nader. It's such a minimal step.
My wife shook her head back at that time when she heard the news of Kucinich being forced out of the debates. She loved Kucinich's candidacy and was heart-broken when he was forced to withdraw due to the corporate wing of the Ohio Democratic Party trying to force him out of his seat in a primary. I wish the party would do the same to the DLC/BlueDog sellouts instead. If this party had more folks like Kucinich, I'd be a card carrying Democrat and not getting frustrated and going Nader. AARP is nothing but a corporate fraud. But now that it is getting its ASS bitten by the Bush/Cheney gangsters, they're trying to pretend they've changed. Those Faustian rascals don't fool us.
Honey, is that you? Just kidding.
Actually, the Dem party WOULD have "more folks like Kucinich" if Dems refused to vote for anybody who didn't take the same stands as he does. I supported him in the last 2 Dem pres. primaries and when he didn't get the nomination I switched to Nader without batting an eyelash because he supported the same things as Kucinich. To me the appropriate "sports" analogy is more like a relay race where the point is to get the baton to the finish line lickety split; when the Dem nominee dropped the single payer baton and Nader ran with it instead, to me it was a no-brainer. Once the Dems learn that they can only win with guys like Kucinich, you will see lots more of them, and they will NEVER learn that as long as we let them get away with being the "lesser evil". We should have been doing this for at least the last decade - we'd have a lot more Kucinichs by now. But it's not too late to do this now (though it may be soon), and this "strategy", unlike voting Dem-no-matter-what, does work once we understand that it is the only one that will and pursue it.
Some argue that the Dems are too far gone and can/will never learn. That may be the case, but I don't really care. If the Dems refuse to meet the needs of our time, I have no problem with them being resigned to the dust bin of history. Though I am a "registered" Dem, I am not a "genetic" Dem and I will support candidates who meet OUR, as opposed to corporate, needs, whatever color their jacket or decal that's on it. When enough of us do that, they'll get the message and we WILL get what we need. Until then, you just better hope you and yours stay healthy. (Hmmm, maybe THAT's the kind of "hope" Obama is preaching!)
Tomorrow the Government is going to take over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They'll be using many tens of billions of taxpayer dollars to save these failing mortgage giants.
SOCIALIZED BANKING!!
When can we get some SOCIALIZED HEALTHCARE?
Why is it SOCIALISM if taxpayer funds are used for the benefit of the masses?
And why is it a BAILOUT if taxpayer money is used for corporate interests?
Excellent point!
GWnorth:
I live in a small town that has 7,000 people in the town and another 10,000 in the outlying areas. We have 4 doctors and all are very happy. They live in the area kids go to the same school as mine. Everyone use to work in the larger cities but moved out for their kids sake. We have 3 hospitals with in 20 to 30 minute drive, even faster in an ambulance. There is also 5 walk in clinics within that same time frame. I agree on how quick tests are set up and done. I have 3 tests set up over the next 2 weeks and my only cost will be for the parking meter. I live in Ontario and I wish Americans could get the same level of coverage as we Canadians get.
I am not familiar with the system in Ontario. I speak more to the issues here in BC where we have many more remote communities up in the North. They have a devil of a time getting doctors to move up there even when offering incentives.
Some of these towns are not served by air and are 18 hour drives through the mountains from Vancouver.
Rest assured I am not in favor of the US system. Indeed were we to have that model here I suggest there would be even less Doctors to service those regions.
A for profit model just could not work in towns of 4000 with many unemployed.
The most difficult things to get across to Americans who speak in favor of their system and decry the "waiting lists" in Canada are these.
1>The waiting list problem is vastly overstated and the groups that advance the claims of waiting lists tend to be funded by the Health Insurance Industry.
2>If we cut off 10 million Canadians from medical care based on how much money they made, we would have no waiting lists.
As I consider myself a member of a community I would much rather see everyone get access to timely and good health care rather then base access on a persons wealth.
I was recently away on Vacation. During the first week I had planned on a golfing trip followed up to a visit to my parents who still live in Edmonton Alberta.
A week in I called my parents to let them know I was on my way and should be there that day > I learned my mother had been taken into the Hospital.
There was no waiting list. She went to see her Doctor because she did not feel good and he sent her directly to the Hospital. There was no waiting list. They had a bed for her. Since she has been in they have run a battery of tests on her. In fact she complains that all they do is run tests. This including MRIS a CAT scan and so on and so forth.
The "waiting list" is something *I* have never encountered. I too had to have a battery of tests run some years back and the longest I waited was 2 weeks and that was because *I* requested the wait as I too was wary of all the appointments they set up for tests. I did not have the time to go in every second day for another test.
How were these tests set up? Feeling not quite right I went in to see my Doctor. I saw him the day after I called in for an appointment. He suggested blood tests and referred me to three specialists for further tests. The Nurse set up all the dates for the tests. Once I had shown the Nurse my health card, there was no further need for me to show it again. All the Doctors and tests were scheduled. No insurance companies needed to give permission. I did not have to sign a single document.
I was not billed a cent. The Doctors and specialists did not worry that I would be unable to pay for the tests I was given. Nor did they have to worry about collecting their fees or that an insurance company might refuse specific tests.
Are there waits? Yes but these happen everywhere. Indeed the Commonwealth study showed that the waiting lists in America were in fact longer then the ones in Europe.
The waits tend to be in emergency room wards and or for non elective surgeries.
Are there Doctor shortages? Yes, but the same occur in the United States. Doctors just do not like working in the smaller towns. This is a fact of life and of geography. Cuba and the EU have more Doctors per capita then Canada and the United States.
Roughly: Canada has 200 drs. per 100,000, Europe 300 and Cuba 400------lizard
addendum
Cuba will accept any medical student from any nation, anywhere, and provide free medical training with the only proviso being that they agree to spend two years practicing medicine among the poorest in their own nation.....tell me again why they are our enemy?
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Thank you , and, it is absolutely true. I have been treated in Canada (for a treatment not yet in use in US), Mexico (my CCF dr. sent me there to get a drug not yet approved in US)and several Western European countries (got to East Berlin and Poland anyway, with friends from WorkCamp). The care was immediate, excellent and free. I dont know whether S citiznes think other countries are just "lying" to them (why??) or what. No one seems to want to hear the truth. I wasnt a "tourist" in Europe--I lived ther for a year (little longer). I was a sstudent, but I hjave auints, uncles and cousins ther--I stil hear from them occasionally. The single payer NHS stil works just fine for them and no one wants to g o back to privitized medicine.Not everything should be "for profit".Health care (drs. should make a living) and war (mercinaries, contracters) comes to mind.
Yes, doctors should make a living or they will be dead and not useful. They should be fed and bathed and brushed and given water. Walk it once in a while.
In Quebec doctors tend to be seen as government property. ..yes, me doctor......lizard
So, you dont see it as a profession that is in existence to help patients that need it. Just sign up for the Cheney plan--you';; only have one patient and you'l;l be paid VERY WELL , I expect. I was merely popinting out that, in most other "advanced" countries, drs. live like the "rest of us". Of course, they dont have to take out monsdtrous loand to go to med. school, and, then , have to go into a well padi specialty to afford to live "i the way to which they have become accoustomed"
Tommy Douglas,a premier of Saskatchewan, implemented a universal single payer health care plan(medicare for all)for his province, from there it grew to become a national program. The majority of Canadians still support it as an effective program. Which one of our states is going to stand up to the all powerful "health care" establishment, and implement universal single payer in their state??
Go to http://www.pnh.org
Vermont?? Probably none. Massachusetts and California would seem to be likely candidates, but,so far, it doesnt look good. If Vermont secedes from the Union (save me a spot!!), they would do it. That wil probably happen any minute now.(PS--are you sure pnh.org is the right link?)
it's www.pnhp.org
Vermont does not have Single Payer because it was blocked by Gov. Howard Dean. He's a doctor and should have known better but, the dem party machine was behind him.
Secession is a good idea, but getting rid of dem/repubs who vote along party lines and are afraid of thinking outside the box, would help a lot. Maybe we can convince them to secede.
VOTE NADER
Actually California's Single Payer Initiative SB-840 first passed both Houses of the State Legislature last year. The measure was vetoed by Arnold Schwarzenegger late last year. The measure was reintroduced this year and passed the Legislature two weeks ago. While it would seem unlikely the Govenator will sign the bill in the current budget crisis there will be a big rally in Sacramento tomorrow September 8th to support the measure.
If SB-840 is vetoed it will be resubmitted again next year. Arnold Schwarzenegger is Term Limited out of Office in 2010. One of the last Old Line Democrats, Lt.Govenor John Garamendi, is consider a favorite to run for the Govenor's seat in 2010. Garamendi has said that he would not only sign SB-840 but would fight the insurance companies to implement it. Garamendi was California's first Insurance Commissioner and earned a well deserved reputation as the Arch Enemy of the Insurance Industry.
Garamendi is one of a handful of Democrats I can support. Until the time that he runs I will work for Ralph Nader.
For more information about SB-840 (California One Care) view : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jB0Vn_BppwM
I wish the Democrats had more people like John Garamendi especially in Washington. In fact, I think Garamendi might want to run for president in 2012. How does he do on other issues?
Garamendi has declared to run for Govenor of California in November 2010. This statement was made on July 31st.
Here is the link to the formal announcement which includes his position on issues that face Californians.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlwKEn9pB5E
Miss Angle
wait times? OK what city do you live in Toronto?
Services random? OK please give more details on that please, yes not all hospitals are equally equip but you family doctor ( that is 100% free to see him) sends you to get testing done. When you are in the hospital you don't get a Doctors bill.
The company I worked for has a health plan along with dental and eye care. Cost is about a cup of coffee and donut a day something we could all do without.
Something you forget is even if you get cancer you still are 100% covered and not kicked out like the US does.
I use to live in the US and can tell you Canadas plan is the best you can get.
Right, the only one's not supporting are the two corporate parties and their candidates Obama and McCain.
I think a government run health care system can run effectively in the U.S. Just be warned, the wait times can be long and services can be random... You get what you pay for! Also, we still have to pay for our prescriptions up here (unless your company has a medical plan) and it's often quite expensive!
I'm certainly one American who'd be willing to take that chance, though some things I have read suggest that a combination of our dramatically larger taxable population, plus the fact that we already pay much more per-capita into the "non-system" that we have, might mean we'd end up with a superior system to Canada's -- and that's if we simply adopted Canada's system as-is.
That's funny. America should have the best in the world since it is the richest large country in the world. Americans could be living an absolutely magical life with health care , free education, free medicines, incredible unemployment insurance and excellent pensions. But nooooo....The money goes to make the rich much richer and into the war machine for the same purpose..
It is only logical that the richest country should have the best quality of life, yet in many ways the quality of life is better amongst the poor of Cuba, and altogether better in ALL the other rich countries of earth..
I'll grant you, though, that it isn't as much fun to live in Finland..Montreal, however.....................................................................................................Why don't you people move over here. You'll be able to breathe...............................................lizard
Someday the U.S. will be dragged, kicking and screaming, into the 21st century. Shout it from the rooftops: We need HR676/ single payer.
Doctor's Orders:
Hang Two Congressmen and Call Back in the Morning.
Repeat as necessary to get Single Payer Health Care.
Humbaba=--good one! But the pescription ought to be modified to include a Senator or two a day because despite the progressive posture of people like Kennedy, Harkin, Sanders, Sherrod Brown, Barbara Boxer, and others not one single Senator has been willing to introduce a companion Senate bill to HR 676.
I don't know whether lobbyists have muzzled them or if its the Democratic Party DLC heirarchy. This is a tell-tale sign that, except for Conyers and the other house co-sponsers, no one in the Democratic Party is very serious about this program. despite
Poet
I agree with everything you say--save one. Sen. Sherrod Brown (I wrote to him about HR676)replied (personally , which he does OCCASIONALLY) "I would be the first to proudly sponser a bil like HR676. As the rules stand we wil have to wait for the House to pass it (it seems to have the votes, but waiting for a pres. that would sign it) , and, if it comes across my desk, rest assured, I will be very happy to see it." He also talked about Sen Reid not wanting to bring it up "yet" (ie; campaign season??). This is not word for word, of course. Even Sen. Voinovich (R--but not a really bad one--look, its Ohio, folks, and it could be Turner, Boehner, etc)says he would be in favor of single payer for "people that need it". Tell Pelosi to get off her ass and do this, as, in the Senate, it would be fillibustered to death.) ps. Jane Mitakides is running to replace Rep Mike Turner, but the DNC has helped her NOT AT ALL> I hear she is not a good campaigner, but I wouldve liked to have helped. I'm just not reg. as a Dem anymore. Political parties are jealous creatures, I suppose. Kindve dumb, though.
Sherrod Brown is pretty cool. If the party had more folks like him, people like me wouldn't be going Nader. The Democratic Party needs more Sherrod Browns. I hope Cindy Sheehan can replace Pelosi by the way.
Yess!!!!!
You are soooo right!
.
KDelphi , I don't always agree with what you say but I like the way you speak up and say your piece.
I can't type so I copy and paste mostly. If I type, the discussion has long passed...LOL
Nannie
.
.
What spelling error?
Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.
.
LOL!! Thanks, and, point taken. Will anyone else take the point, or will people keep correcting each others' spelling and grammer like old school marms. Lets waste our time on that!
The brain is a marvelous and very under utilized tool....
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
That's really cool!.................lizard
You do realize that this is a spoof, right? You can find this one in the urban legends online. There are several sites that try to debunk these claims. I use www.snopes.com for checking out silly stuff that gets passed around the net.
Snopes.com calls this one "undetermined", so apparently the verdict is still out. Clearly, you can read it. Whether or not it is someone's research project may be the unanswered question.
.
single payer national health insurance:
Nader: On the table; Obama/McCain: Off the table
http://www.votenader.org/issues/
.
Voting Obama is the last best shot we have at having a government for the people, including a single payer health care system.
I suggest you use that phrase 'single payer' as often as possible while you still can. After four years of McCain saying it once will land you in jail, probably never to be heard from again.
Actually Obama's Healthcare is in it's essence even worse than McCain's with respects to achieving Single Payer. Obama's plan will leave the insurance companies in place. It claims to compel those insurance companies to spend more of the monies collected from premiums on delivering health care but provides no enforcement mechanism. It will bang doctors over the head to "prove" they rendered effect care. It will pour in more federal dollars to absorb certain medical expenditures. (something borrowed from the Kerry plan) And it will also reinstitute the SChp program.
At best these measures can be described as little more than band-aids. Realistically they amount to smoke and mirrors. What they will gain us is 5 to 10 years of temporary relief after which the same problems will reappear with the addition of a Medicare Crisis. So in this one very important respect the country should be able to extract itself from McCain's "do nothing" approach far more easily compared to the work needed to right the Health care System from Barack Obama's Convoluted Mess.
Some choice huh !
McCain gives us the option of doing nothing
Obama takes us down the wrong road
Vote Nader
javier, Tragic but true
’m posting this at both TD and CD for KDelphi just to cover those two bases.
Everybody is hearing you KDelphi or are you not reading the Truthdiggers and CommonDreamers at TD and on CD? You might trying to channel your passion directly to Obama or McInsane. Your reference to how the rest of the world feels about America is futile and a misguided effort on the topic of universal healthcare in America, single payer or not. But of course you can spend your energy wherever and however you like on whatever you like. Just trying to be helpful so that your tirades at least have some effective use. Over and out on this topic.
Daddy! These two girls are following me around and caling me names! Make'em stop!Oh, that's OK honey. Just ignore them. They'll find somethign better to do. Hopefully.
lol kdelph....look at your keyboard. see the enter tab..right above the shift tab? hit that when u wanna start a new paragraph...even though i do even find your stuff charming in block posts.
Thanks! About the keyboard stuff! she--because 1)everytime I say anything now worshipful about Obama, you follow me around and yelo, you chase peopoe out of TD and 2) you know that I have talked to his campaign several times about it and 3a0 mccain--it would be useless and 4)i have come to believe that neither of these men is relevant to achieving wht am has to achieve in the near future Thanks tho! I'm here to learn!
An example of political ineptness is the abscence of an open mind and a desire to learn. Most Americans think they already know what life is about and have simplified their thinking to God, family, "HOMELAND" (formerly country), and individual independance. The path away from God leads to rationality, such as inspired Jefferson when rationality made its debut in the French enlightment. As such, the founding fathers were either atheitists or very unreligious. If we take Jefferson as an example, it is clear that the overwhelming majority of Americans are not anything like Jefferson. Jefferson would be in jail in this country. He believed in getting nasty and breaking laws in the defense of rights. Much like Washington. Lincoln is the founding father of the present US. Jefferson is dead. Lincoln lives.
The average American mind is incapable of understanding nature or society. While the farmer understands nature from his experience, and the worker understands his job and becomes an expert at it, the majority of people do not understand nature or their own society beyond their experience.
Hence a majority of Americans have still not understood that evolution is not a theory, and is not debatable. It is over-philosophical to argue that gravity does not exist. What causes it is another question. So it is for evolution. Yet, the majority do not understand that denying evolution is the same as denying gravity. Yet, not one of these creationist people would deny the evolution of the American automobile, and yet it is the same as animal evolution. Such is the sad state of affairs at the turn of the 21st century.
Likewise, the people have failed to discover that the way forward toward a modern society is the recognition of social, versus individual interests. Americas has failed to come together to provide for the common good. America has failed to live harmoniously with the rest of the world and with itself. America holds more people in prison than any other country, absolutely or per capita. America spends more than the rest of the world combined in its aggressive, rather than defensive, military.
This is not a wise society in harmony with itself or others.............lizard
very well said!
Just "describing" problems is way too easy. Both candidates are doing it. Do you have any ideas for what to do about any of these problems? Most people know thsi stuff, whether they admit it or not. What is to be done, in your mind?
The usual way is by revolution, seizing the school system and teaching the children the truth. The other, more laborious way is to change the mentality of the people through books, films, articles, and discussion groups. Science has played a large role in changing the mentality of the people as well. Social evolution shows that advanced thinking leads to a fairer more peaceful society. Typically the advanced country abandons religion for ethics and god for science. One of the things that must be changed is the belief in the supernatural. A country that detests atheists and is deeply immersed in magical thinking (magic: a system of ritual incanatations for the purpose of inducing a supernatural being to do your will) cannot expect to be able to handle the manipulations of educated, clever, rich, and powerful people. In the abscence of a revolution it takes a very long time to change the mentality of a people significantly. The changes we do experience are generated by small revolutions such as the civil rights movement and the women's liberation movements. Thus it is best to think in terms of the formation of a movement. There is little motivation for this at present. A crisis may very well be the catalyst. Inadequate answer probably.
What needs to be done, in a nutshell, is already being done, by other countries. We just have to follow their example.Americans will eventually realize that they are too far behind and then a movement might find support. An advanced society today is one where the people don't worry about personal health care costs, unemploymnent, enjoy a relative freedom from crime, have schooling for their children, and the rule of law. These countries generally demonstrate a decreased prevalence of religious belief, suggesting this is an indicator for improved understanding of reality from which comes the advancement of the society. ............
Good post. I agree with just about all of it. And, despite a lot of Americans' hatred (jealousy?) of more advanced countries' supposed "lack of total economic freedom" (ie laissez-faire economics), would you think that privitizing everything,leaving people who are down to fend for themselves, and requiring people to sing (in church) for their supper, would be a good way to correct our economic downward spiral, or..would it not. Only partially rhetorical. Would you also think that hiring someone from the Chicago Skool of Economics would be a good way to fix our economic distress? I mean, evolution is a scientific fact, but I do not think that it should be "applied from on high" to "speed it up" aka. Joseph Goebbels by the liked of the Am. "Enterprise" Institute. or the Club for Growth (just think abou that name for a minute!! Geeez!) Just trying to engage here.
There is currently a drive to bring researchers together to 'cure' cancer. What came to mind was that, even if a cure is found, would those who are uninsured be able to get it? Providing universal health care would presumably lead many more to an early diagnosis before it's too late, thus dramatically reducing cancer death rates. Just a thought.
There is no incentive for capitalists to find cures for diseases. Treating a disease is where the big money is.
McCain and Obama both deserve to win, McCain more so, because they represent the true character of the American people. Kucinich, Nader, McKinney,Paul and Gravel, are justifiably the losers because they are very far from the mentality of the American people. They are in fact, curiosities that are laughed about. The American people are unworthy of being led by any of these losers.Democracy's shortcomings are very evident in the US. As an expression of the will of the people, the US government is a true result of democracy. For a democracy to function properly the people must have a certain level of intelligence and awareness and must participate. The US, with 50% people not voting, and an abundance of hyperreligiosity, militarism and patriotism is incapable of making democracy produce a modern society. Simply put, Americans are politically inept and mentally challenged.Hence, the country is a disgrace, as it is logical to expect..LIVE WITH THAT............................lizard
McCain doesn't represent true character. Hello? The man has always been corrupt. First he was obeying illegal orders to bomb civilians in North Vietnam. Later he was on the take for 100 grand to a corrupt Savings and Loan owner, willing to do the man's bidding to save his collapsing Ponzi scheme. Last, he's been selling the criminal attack and occupation of Iraq as some kind of holy defense of the Republic.
Pathetic.
Barack Obama was for single payer before he came out against it.
Sad to note that Javier is exactly right on this. We get the government we deserve by failing to participate, by allowing the electorate to be swindled, election after election, with false promises and empty rhetoric, we sit by idly while our leaders violate the constitution and the laws of this land. We vote, again and again, for parties and candidates who then abrogate every single campaign promise they made, whose campaigns for the most part are sketchy and nebulous and are stupid appeals to testosterone instead of intellect.
We the people have all the power and none of the drive to make changes that would make our nation a far better place. In short, we deserve McCain and Obama.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
and he is called a hero..................lizard
Americans get what they deserve. Americans do not deserve a rational health care system. Americans deserve to be controlled and exploited, their obtuseness allows for nothing else. American mentalities must change before they can be deserving of a modern society. No society that dedicates itself to plundering others can expect to live decently, since the mentality that condones and encourages plundering is not capable of building a just society, this , I think is self evident. That is why the brits eventually chose to give up the empire, they realized it was destroying their society. Plus, they went broke. The US must go through the same process......................lizard
Hey, don't lump me (and tens of millions of patriots like me) in with people like the contemptible Sarah Palin.
Barack Obama was for single payer before he came out against it.
What of people that protested in the streets , trying to stop this war, and got arrested? What do WE deserve? I think the Am. people, victims of a crappy educational system, have been sorely used and abused. Not everyone, certainly. But to advocate dismanteling the public school sytem as we know it, and then blame people for being stupid, when they learn in their charter/faithbased/nochildsbehindeleft school, that there were baby dinasaurs on the Ark--what do yu expect.
You deserve a better life, but you are not "America", and neither am I. . lizard
Tell Obama - he's agin it.
"An estimated $25 out of each $100 spent goes to paperwork, profits, and executive pay and bonuses"
The truth is that more like $50 per $100 spent on healthcare in the USA goes to paperwork, profits, executive pay and bonuses, marketing, unnecessary treatments, reactive instead of preventive treatments, etc. See quote below.
But even 50% waste is a conservative figure because this compares the US system with those of other industrial countries under significant influence of the USA. Cuba's system performs many times better in terms of bang for the buck.
wikipedia: An oft-cited study by Harvard Medical School and the Canadian Institute for Health Information determined that some 31% of U.S. health care dollars, or more than $1,000 per person per year, went to health care administrative costs
From my years working in IT in hospitals, your estimate seems closer to the truth. There is a ridiculous amount of time, money, paperwork and cleverness spent on trying to collect revenue from competing insurers who change their rules constantly at will.
The level of executive pay and bonuses invalidate the designation "non-profit". There should be some level of control for institutions that are given tax exemption status and rely on government sources such as Medicare.
Marketing includes hordes of well-groomed sales reps from high tech and pharma companies who can be seen sitting in office after office with their rolling suitcases of goodies and promotions for their products. They distribute mountains of chatchkes and sponsor all sorts of "Health Fairs" to tout their goods. Their air fares alone...
Joe
Just relax and die quietly.
Nice. Now all the Obama supporters sound like neo-cons.I probably wil. So will 19,999 other people this year. I know you dont care.That says alot more about you than it dose me.
20,000 people a year. More than Iraq (not counting civilians). If we strive to be a more moral nation, how can we NOT do this. Please, sheeples. Be peoples.Do it for someone you care about--I'm sure you al know someone hurt by this draconion,laissez-faire capitalist system. I used to have a sign on my desk (until the director made me take it off, because I wasnt getting my paperwork in ontime--lol)"People, not Papers". A client made it for me. Similarly--Health Care for People--Not for MOney. If drs are so greedy that they can't accept a salary--they are in the wrong field. There are too many specialists. They can go be plastic surgeons or do female circumcism in Saudi Arabia, for the Royal fanmily. I dont care! Nobody did anything as the manufacturing base of the midwest shut down. The answer was "Go back to college! Get a degree in --computers, or something." Alot of people did,. Then, they shipped the pc jobs to China. So, why the sudden concern for people making a living turning people down for health care? People need to learn how to make a living in ways that do not cause others' death--like war profiteering and HMO-ing. Hedge Fund-ing. None of these are moral ways to live.
KDelphi--
I respect both your passion and vulnerability. The beauty of single-payer as proposed by the Conyers bill is that it does not outlaw private practice or even health insurance. What it does is give "we the people" an alternative and the power to bargain with healthcare providers as a unified block for the lowest prices on drugs and treatment. It also takes a heap big share of the extortionate profit out of the way we now finance healthcare.
So if you are too proud or elitist for government run healthcare then go buy your own coverage or practice--just don't forget your civic duty to pay your taxes for the program that cares for the rest of us.
Poet
Thank you, poet. I would be completely thrilled if Obama would back HR676. As Jim Hightower said, "Those that say it cant be done should not be allowed to interfere with those that are doing it". Rep. Conyers abviously thinks we can do it, as does Rep. Lee, Rep. Lee (both! lol) and many others. I dont just plead for this for myself--it might stil keep me on Medicaid.(Although , it would prob. improve the care) We al know that people are dying over this archaic , primitivistic systrem. I just think it is too sad. This is NOT about what you think of ME! I wish people would push Sen Obama to back HR 676. I kept saying that yesterday on TD, CD , because people just brush over it, as if no plan exists! Obama could support----HR 676 . That is not too much to ask. It is backed by one of our most experienced and determined Congress-people. What's is so "rabid" about that?
I vociferously disagree about doctors. I had quite a few doctors in my lifetime for very serious and normal checkup reasons. Two were not as ethical as they should have been: one of those who made a really spurious diagnosis that would have involved a completely unnecessary surgery was actually murdered by a robber in his own home. The other was an anesthesiologist who thought he ought to get some free feelies from drowsy female patients! Because he was caught, he was eventually fired and license revoked! Some body may have even sued. It should have been a class action suit on behalf of every female (or males, who knows?) patient he ever had! because it is too hard to prove he violated you if you were sedated! Oh well, that was only two out of dozens who were absolutely professional and caring and my life is good today because of them. Most of these doctors, all are republicans, favor single payer health insurance. I don’t know if all of them do because I hadn’t spoken with all of them about it. But those I did, said they did.
KDelphi, In deference to your passionate pleas, I am here because you recommended on the TD site to check this article out. I see, however, you are just as rabid here as you are there. You really ought to cool down. You are just going over and over again and again your same somewhat confusing litany. Not sure who you are now trying to convince and of what exactly. Try printing out all of your posts here and there to see what you have been saying and if it makes sense to yourself. And if maybe you haven’t already covered the bases, several times.
I say things over and over because no one seems to hear them! I feel VERY strongly about it! It is a life and death matter for myself and several peopel I know and love. Mayve I am to emotinal about it,but if we make it strictly a "plank piece" in a platform--then it doesnt striek anyone as anything other than a financial matter. And that s not the way the rest of the world sees it. They think we are greedy adn stupid. I cant help it if I post the same stuff about the same issue on diff sites, if the same peope are reading them--I feel the same way I did on TD. It sounds like the drs. you went to should be sued. At least they lost their license.(unless they can "go over state lines")I dont know whether a single payer system would make that better. But , it might get rid of drs who just want to make alot of money.I guess that would depend on whether GOP were able to slip an "arbitration" clause in to the plan, like they have done with so much else. Read some of the other posts on here--to many people are falilng through the cracks. I keep reading articles about it. And, everywhere, people come up with reasons as to why it wont work, single-payer. Wel, I just dont buy it. As for "leaving home" (since you are bringing in what I talked about on the td posts) I would GLADLY leave the US, if I could. It is not a "home" to me anymore.
We have a right--maybe an obligation--to MAKE our politicians do this!! Everywhere else in the civilized worold, they have it. It's just impossible to believe that the uS is so "exceptional" that we cant do it. We HAVE to do it. I hear Newt gGingrich in the background, lying about "socialized medicine"--you want to rol with those guys?? They're LYING! They are invested in YOU NOT getting good health care! DONT LET THEM DO IT! If notnow--when? If not us--who?
I was quite young when Canada first introduced Universal health Care. As I grew up on the farm when we were children we just did not have health care of any sort. When my parents needed to take one of my siblings to the hospital all the money came out of pocket which can be pretty hard to do when you do not have a steady monthly income.
How do people like farmers or the self employed manage to get health care? I understand you can buy it privately , but I can only imagine that it a nightmare to manage and worry about as one tries to ensure the premiums paid diligently.
What do you do as a self employed individual if you have no income for 2 or three months , or if it drops dramaticaly? Can people not see how this would directly impact that so called "American dream" and rather then grant an individual "freedom" , would in fact sentence said person to a lifetime a wage labor servitude?
The underlying problem as I see it is that we speak to the converted here. I doubt one CD reader in 100 would be opposed to Universal Health Care delivered via a single payer system. There is a vast swathe of Americans that simply buy into the fear mongering and they wont be reading these types of articles.
We live in a culture that worships at the altar of the free market and sees it as the solution to all problems. Conversely, it believes government is inefficient, can do nothing right, and, in a word, is the enemy. ....Over come this, and we can have single payer.
Could you outline the system you have, I mean day to day reality, not the form. What is real experience if you don't mind? How does it actually work?
Why don't you explain your system in Texas now that others have told you theirs? You voted for a bad system by electing from the two party duopoly so you're not gonna get single payer in TX like it or not, sonny.
Some day to day realities in the New Zealand health system:
All of our grandchildren had the advantage of parents who took part in antenatal training. A midwife is generally there for consultation during all the months of pregnancy and is also at the mother's side for all the hours of labor. With two of the children complications meant that an Obstetrician had to be called in and a c section was the way the healthy baby arrived. No one had to worry about money. The main priority was getting this healthy baby and of course, taking care of the mother's health too.
After the birth, when the family is back home, a nurse makes home visits, at first weekly and then once a month. She weighs and checks the baby and gives advice to the new mother.
One of our grandchildren had a condition that required specialist care and after consultaion and observation in the home he entered a program with physiotherapists at our local hospital. This has been an amazing experience for all of us. The whole family can go if they want, but usually its the mothers or fathers and us grandmothers. Two physiotherapists work with the 4 children and their support groups, first in activites for small muscle control and then (our grandson's favorite) into the gym where they are encouraged to use both both hands and legs to climb, ride bikes, jump and run. Our grandson has been in this programme for 2 years now and by the time he goes to school next year at age 5 he will have overcome his physical disabilities to a large extent. The interventions that specialists have provided are an eye operation to correct a squint and a brace on his weak leg. Probably the leg will need an operation in the future and the brace won't be a necessity, but right now the leg is being strengthened and he can run as fast as any of his 3 year old friends.
Well that's some day to day details. Just a word on choosing your doctor and getting an appointment. There are several local practices near us and we go to a medical centre that has 6 doctors to choose from. By choice, I go to the female doctor and my husband goes to a male doctor. We usually are able to get in to see them on the same or next day. The cost for retired people is $15 and if we require a prescription or several, the cost is $3. Children are free. Adults pay $28.
Of course, if you require hospitalization this is all free for everyone. No one ever went bankrupt paying medical bills. You have peace of mind knowing that money will not be the worry when your health fails - you will have enough to think about in your recovery.
There is a big emphasis on keeping fit and well here in New Zealand. We have something called the Green Prescription. But that is another story.
For dual citizens travelling to the US we are always nervous and buy the most comprehensive insurance that we can afford.
Thanks very much for that information.
And what is "the Green Prescription"?
In New Zealand, The Green Prescription is one that doctor's give when the patient is in ill health that could be improved with a better diet and an exercise program. The doctor writes the prescription and they are referred to a person who is trained in these fields and who will mentor them along the way. People in our area are encouraged to go to the aquatic center where they take part in water walking and other exercises that are low impact for over weight people. Often they give them small steps to take like getting rid of the tv remote and standing up to change stations or each time a commercial comes on to get out of their chair and walk around the house. Usually these are people that need many small steps before they can undertake more challenging walking or exercise programs.
At present the government is promoting the idea of falls prevention and participation in Tai Chi for older people. Programs are in place for both of these. This year I have taken part in a community coaches course that involves learning about the muscles and bones, roadblocks to a more active life, how to lead exercises to music, a full first aid course and in the next weeks the final part will be a nutrition course, among other things. This is all for volunteers who want to organise groups wanting to be active in their later years.