Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
First Anniversary: The Incredible Shrinking Obama Health Care Law
At its one year anniversary the Obama health care law is shrinking while the health care crisis grows. Americans who lack any health coverage still exceeds 50 million, over 45,000 deaths occur annually due to lack of health insurance, and 40 million Americans, including over 10 million children, are underinsured.
Premiums are rising and coverage is shrinking a new norm is taking hold in America: ‘Unaffordable underinsurance.’ This month, the number of waivers granted to the Obama health law broke 1,000 protecting inadequate insurance plans. The expansion of health insurance to the uninsured is becoming a mirage. The Obama administration has told states they could reduce the number of people covered by Medicaid as well as reduce the services provided. And, the centerpiece of the law is under court challenge – the mandate is the first time ever the federal government has forced Americans to buy a corporate product, private health insurance – is heading to a close Supreme Court decision.
The New Norm: ‘Unaffordable underinsurance’
To make insurance premiums affordable, the quality of insurance will need to be reduced so there is less coverage and more out-of-pocket costs, as Don McCanne, MD, Senior Health Policy Fellow for Physicians for a National Health Program writes: “’Unaffordable underinsurance’ is rapidly becoming the new standard in the United States.” The trend in health insurance is rising premiums and shrinking coverage for many Americans who get their coverage at work as well as on the individual insurance market.
Premiums have been increasing with reports ranging from 20% to 60% increases for many Americans and businesses. Further, the law may decrease employment-based insurance by 3 million people by 2019, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Joint Committee on Taxation. This combined with high unemployment and underemployment will push people into the individual insurance market. The individual market is particularly at risk for increased premiums which is of growing importance because of high unemployment. Blue Shield of California decided this month to withdraw a major hike in the face of public outcry. This proposed 30%-35% increase would have been the third rate hike since October, the three increases would have raised rates by 59% to87% for 200,000 policy holders. While some hope the Obama health law will slow premium hikes, Claudia Fegan, MD of Physicians for a National Health Program writes under the Obama heath law “sudden premium hikes are still possible and, in my opinion, quite likely under the new law.”
Underinsurance, requiring Americans to pay more of the cost of health care, may become the norm because of the 2010 law. The new law will hasten the current trend toward underinsurance as plans where patients pay an average of 40% of their health care bills qualify to fulfill the employers' obligations to provide coverage rather than pay an assessment. Massachusetts, the model on which the Obama reforms are based, recently found that medical bankruptcies have not decreased with the new law. The lesson – it is not just health insurance, but the quality of the insurance that matters. After deriding merely adequate insurance as Cadillac Plans,” the Obama administration is showing support for high deductibility plans with large out of pocket costs that do not provide financial or health security.
One promise of the Obama health plan was that millions of underinsured would get decent insurance coverage because the “reform” required minimum levels of insurance. But, waivers to the requirements of the 2010 law are being widely granted resulting in millions of Americans continuing to have inadequate health coverage. Waivers allowing poor quality insurance affect 2.6 million people and are being granted rapidly to businesses, unions, insurance companies as well as states who cannot meet the Obama law requirements. The administration says the purpose of the waivers is to avoid disruption in the insurance market, in clearer language it is to preventemployers from dropping coverage and insurance companies from leaving markets. The requirement for a waiver is relatively simple; the applicant must show HHS “a significant increase in premiums or a decrease in access to benefits.” Ninety-four percent of requests for waivers have been granted, the largest area where waivers have been denied has been for unions. Republicans have asked HHS for in-depth details about every waiver decision and request.
The major area of waivers are so-called mini-med plans, these are limited medical plans which provide workers with as little as $2,000 in health care coverage. The Obama health care law requires $750,000 minimum coverage in 2011. The mini-med plans do not provide security in the event of serious illness or accident. The vast majority of these waivers are for employment-based health coverage. Some of the initial waivers went to fast food chains like McDonalds and Jack-in-the-Box. Unions, insurance companies and state governments have also received waivers. Four states have received waivers, Florida, New Jersey, Ohio and Tennessee. Waivers are set to disappear in 2014, when people will be required to purchase insurance with tax payer subsidies – assuming that Obama health law survives and that low-paid workers can afford insurance even with a subsidy.
Expanded Numbers of Americans with Insurance Becoming a Mirage
The two largest areas of expansion, Medicaid and the insurance mandate are in jeopardy. States are cutting the number of people covered by Medicaid and reducing health coverage. The insurance mandate is under constitutional attack. And, there is little evidence that people are taking advantage of programs that provide coverage for those with pre-existing illness.
The area with the biggest immediate impact on reduced coverage is the roll backs of Medicaid. Medicaid was projected to be the largest area of expansion of medical care under the Obama health care plan, covering 16 million more people, making up half the projected increase in additional Americans covered with some type of insurance under the Obama law. That is now becoming a mirage.
HHS Secretary Sebelius wrote the 50 states letting them know benefits could be cut, poor people could be required to pay a higher share of costs and that federal law allows states to reduce people covered by Medicaid. Medicaid is health care for the poor and is jointly funded by federal and state governments. Medicaid currently covers 53 million poor children, poor pregnant women and disabled and extremely poor adults. Individuals must make less than $14,500 to be included in Medicaid.
More than half the states want permission to remove hundreds of thousands of people from Medicaid. Arizona alone is planning to reduce Medicaid coverage by 250,000 people and the Obama administration has indicated it will not oppose this reduction in coverage. In Wisconsin, where Governor Walker has proposed deep cuts to Badgercare (which includes Medicaid and other programs) up to 350,000 could lose health care coverage. Rather than an increase in the number of people covered, the nation is on a path to reduce total people covered.
Other states, like New York, Hawaii and California which are led by Democratic governors, are cutting benefits of Medicaid programs that already provide insufficient coverage. Medicaid is often one of the largest expenses of a state but because the cost is shared with the federal government it is also a large source of revenue. As a result it takes more than $2 of Medicaid cuts to save a state $1. When Medicaid is cut the economy is weakened and revenues reduced as for every dollar cut, health care jobs are lost. Cutting health care for the poor and disabled continues the downward economic spiral – the race to the bottom.
When it comes to people taking advantage of expected benefits of the health care law, thus far only 12,000 people have enrolled in the Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan despite an aggressive marketing effort. The Medicare actuary, Rick Foster, told The Hillthe low enrollment is a “surprise,” given that “millions” are eligible for the coverage. The Medicare actuary had conservatively predicted the new pools would enroll 375,000 people by the end of 2010, but that projection has not been met because the insurance is too expensive for most people who need it.
Better results might be being seen for young adults. Approximately 13.2 million 18-29 year olds are without insurance, 30% of that population. Under the health care law these youth can stay covered under the parents’ health insurance. There are no hard numbers for how many have taken advantage of this but the Obama administration estimates it could be as many as 1.2 million. As we see with the pre-existing illness option, predictions are one thing and reality is very likely another. Covering each dependent will cost about $3,380 in 2011, so it is difficult to predict how many families can afford that cost in these difficult economic times when unemployment and underemployment are up and incomes are down.
The Obama health care law may decrease employment-based insurance by 3 million people by 2019, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Joint Committee on Taxation. One estimate made by the CBO is that 8–9 million people currently covered under an employer plan would lose employer coverage because firms would choose to no longer offer coverage. They assume this would be balanced in part by those getting coverage on the exchange.
The other area where increased coverage was promised is the mandate forcing Americans to buy insurance. The mandate is hotly contested in the courts with 27 states challenging the law and over 20 lawsuits filed it. The courts have split 3-2 in favor of the mandate thus far. In the two decisions finding the mandate unconstitutional, a Virginia judge threw out only the mandate, while a Florida judge found the mandate so intertwined with the rest of the law that he would stop the whole law. The decisions have been issued along partisan lines, with three district judges appointed by Bill Clinton upholding the law; and two district judges — one appointed by Ronald Reagan and the other by George W. Bush — finding it unconstitutional. The U.S. Supreme court has five Republican appointed justices and four appointed by Democrats. It is generally viewed as four on the center-left, four on the right and Justice Kennedy as the swing vote. The vote on the Supreme Court will be a close one.
The health care law faces a congressional challenge, especially from the Republican controlled House of Representatives which has already voted to repeal the law, but more importantly, promises to use the power of the purse to not fund its implementation.
Single Payer Rising: Why Not Just Improve and Expand Medicare to All?
The imploding health care law is creating an opening which may require a re-consideration of health care reform within the next five years. Americans consistently favor simply expanding and improving Medicare to cover all Americans. Terry Dougherty, director of MassHealth, from a state which the model for the Obama law is in place is reaching the obvious conclusion: “I like the market, but the more and more I stay in it, the more and more I think that maybe a single payer would be better.” He notes that unlike the insurance industry government costs less, with much lower administrative costs and “We don’t build big buildings. We don’t have high salaries. We don’t have a lot of marketing.”
The low cost of publicly funded health care is consistent with the experience of America’s single payer system – Medicare. The administrative cost of running the Medicare program has remained under 2%. But, the bureaucracy of trying to control the insurance industry is already growing rapidly. The growth of the federal insurance bureaucracy, the federal office that regulates private insurance along with other important duties under the Obama health law, already has 252 employees and a budget of $93 million for 2012 budget requested by the White House.
While the single payer movement is growing stronger through groups like Health Care Now and Physicians for a National Health Program, the insurance industry is also getting stronger. Not only will they receive hundreds of millions in new annual tax payer subsidies but they are taking over other parts of health care. Kaiser Health News reports “Insurers have moved into technology, health-care delivery, physician management, workplace wellness, financial services and overseas ventures.” The Obama law is spurring the cancer of health insurance to spread throughout health care.
At the state level Vermont is striving toward single payer. Governor Shumlin, his technical advisers and Vermonters support a single payer program, and are considering a bill that reduces the number of funding sources and if federal waivers are granted, which Obama reportedly supports, it will evolve into a single payer program. The current version of the bill falls short of the goals of advocates who want health care treated as a human right as well as of physicians who seek a single payer program.
The "Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act," H.R. 676, a bill that sets up a single payer system has been introduced. It would provide health care to all and give consumers the most choice, provide strong health coverage as well as save money for government, business and individuals. Unlike the Obama law, improved Medicare for all would also be easier to implement. Medicare transitioned Americans over 65 from private insurance to Medicare within a year and did so without computers.
The failing Obama reforms shows that the obvious must be faced: confront the health insurance industry which makes coverage of all Americans unaffordable. President Obama knew before running for president that single payer was the solution, but after receiving $20 million in donations from the insurance industry refused to let the only real solution, improved Medicare for all, be considered. It is time to put in place a single payer health care program that ensures that all U.S. residents have quality health care at less cost than they currently pay.
- Posted in


33 Comments so far
Show AllAmong the many things President Obama "knew before running for president" that he quickly forgot the moment he was sworn it. I sometimes wonder, as I do about all his sort, whether he meant what he was saying during the campaign or was a cynical knowing liar the whole time.
A lot of people who post on this site will weigh in on the "cynical knowing liar" side of that question. I'm just not sure being well familiar with the human capacity for self delusion (from long personal experience).
WIth all due respect, I think your question is distracting.
To me, a more helpful, proactive question is: what do we (the common people) need to know or do right now (individually and collectively) to support Single Payer, and the other good ideas out there that need to be implemented.
Because it's going to be the common people (rather than the political celebrities) who make the change. Don't let yourself get distracted from the work that needs doing to make this happen! What can we the common people do to make this change happen?
I like to distract myself, but your "due respect" is appreciated and your point is well taken. OK, then, what do we the common people do to make this happen? I don't know and, as a pessimist, wonder if there really is anything. I'm prepared to be shown the way.
Keep in mind that as big corporations use their low interest taxpayer fuunded bailout warchests to speculate on commodities, merge and off shore jobs, we are reminded that small businesses, not big companies will provide the jobs that spread the "economic recovery" from Wall Street to Main Street.
Obamacare further entrenches the employer sponsored private insurance model that prevents US businesses from competing internationally, thereby preventing the hiring of millions of new employees each year in the US.
There will not be an economic recovery for Main Street until Obamacare is replaced with single-payer.
Unfortunately, it may not even happen then. Economic recovery under current conditions would be quite an achievement. Are we up to it? Time (and not all that much time) will tell.
Maybe healthcare reform should start at the state level--as it has in Vermont. If single-payer can deliver the goods (and I believe it can), then let certain states try it--and if businesses decide to locate there because of lower healthcare costs for their employees, then so be it. The states with the best deal for prospective employers will win out and those that struggle with the present system will find themselves poorer and poorer as businesses leave the state. I do not expect the federal government to do the right thing--ever--and so it is time to turn our backs on the clowns that guide that leaking ship which is listing to one side and dragging its anchor. Good luck Vermont and all other progressive states!
Such programs ALWAYS start at a state or local level, creating a local competitive advantage that results in relatively rapid expansion to other jurisdictions.
Canada's single-payer system started in one of the least populated provinces (Sakatchewan). As soon as the business community in other provinces recognized the difficulty they were having trying to compete with Saskatechewan businesses (that didn't have to mess with providing medical insurance for their employees) the politicians in other provinces were pressured to adopt single payer.
As soon as one of the 50 states implements single-payer, businesses will start moving there and other states will adopt single-payer ot keep their businesses from fleeing to the single-payer state.
Actually the push for Canada's single payer was from the people and not businesses. The Businesses did not get on board until it was already well established in a number of provinces.
The people in Alberta said WE want that followed by those in Manitoba and so on.They saw a good thing and demanded their Government provide it..
Now In Canada Health Care is a provincial responsibility but as more and more provinces adopted their own plans the Federal Government saw a need to standardize across the country . This was in part driven by business.
Saskatchewan really did not have a whole lot of Businesses. They were primarily agricultural . The Business Community was centralized in Toronto. There was no movement of business to Saskatchewan because of their adoption of single payer.
Massive political action will not change the system. If you are so sick you are going to die with lack of medical treatment, commit a serious crime, then the state will be obligated to get you health care.
This is revolution one person at a time.
No guts, no glory.
I like the plan, though not enough to go do a crime and do the time right now. I'll keep that option in mind, but I suspect that if we were all in jail with health care problems the system would go bankrupt there too and the state would find a way to reneg on its "obligation."
The Mississippi Governor has been releasing inmates with expensive illnesses early to cut inmate medical costs.
I find this whole anti-health care debacle quite amusing, Since a whole lot of citizens go to emergency rooms for not real emergencies why have healthcare. Plus in the GOP who are the leaders of this health care fiasco no constituents ever get sick.
Now this Medicare For All may actually have some merit.
I am 56 and was laid off two years ago. I paid COBRA for over a year, until Congress starting jerking us around about COBRA and unemployment. I switched to Atlantis Health Plan based in Manhattan with its claims processing dept in Houston. Under that I was paying $410 a month instead of the $900 a month with COBRA. I was told it would cover major surgery and the usual tests. I was wrong. I had ARDS (acute respiratory distress syndrome) in 2004 and my heart got up to a rate of 140 beats a minute. A doctor told my wife he was going to write about it in the New ENgland Journal of Medicine. My insurance, via the New York Law Journal, covered everything for 7 months of surgery, coma and rehab. With Atlantis, I told my "primary" doctor, Tung, on 8th Ave, that I was feeling palpitations. he referred me to Maurice Raschko. All of this was supposed to be covered, except for $200 deductible. In Raschko's office, I had to wait for a "stress echocardiogram" to be OK's by Atlantis. They finally told me they would call as to whether it was covered within three weeks. (Plenty of time to die.) They never callled. I called and found out it was NOT covered. It had been routinely covered by the New York Law Journal's health benefits. I canceled Atlantis and bought AMG Medical Group at $70 a month, so I could go on seeing Dr. Tung. I figured if I went to the ER, at least those docs--if they worked on me--would have someone to call for additional info. Tung told me the AMG plan would cover blood and urine tests and prescriptions. The first prescriptions I tried to fill for xanax and prozac were NOT covered and I had to pay retail, about $400. So, now, my non-major-problem coverage is $470 a month. If I have a heart attack and my wife gets me to the ER on time and a doc works on me--all highly unlikely, I would be sent to rehab at NYC's rehab center on Roosevelt Island, which has 10 men crammed side by side, with yellow curtains separating them (like the ones you see in MASH TV shows) and a constant smell of urine. At night, some men groan constantly with pain or with untreated psychological problems. I've been there. I had a friend who had no insurance two years ago. He was lucky that the surgeon was competent, but I do NOT know how he survived the urine-MASH rehab unit. In fact, he signed himself out early, despite barely standing up with a walker. Two years later, he still limps and groans when he sits in church. His and my lifespans have been cut by 15 years, likely. I'm sure that's not enough for the fat, old, white GOP elite pigs, who, as Howard Dean says, are killing the middle class and lower class people with a "death of a thousand cuts."
Throughout the 2009 health care "debate" Obama kept telling us that a "public option is needed to keep insurance companies honest".
In late 2009 Obama told us he would sign bill that didn't include a "public option".
More than a year after he signed it, neither Obama or anybody else has told us how insurance companies will be kept honest now that there is an "individual mandate" but no public option .
I am so sorry to hear what you have gone through health wise, and the fraud you have run into with the faux insurance scams. It takes a special kind of depraved person/organization to scam the sick, and unfortunately where we live, which barely passes for a "country" anymore is loaded with them.
Today I saw some new colon cleansing crap being sold on the boob tube. The new snake oil salesmen of our day. It is really quite brillliant when you think about. Sell people stuff that is supposed to make their crap better. Butt face it, it still comes out as crap, and who is really going to look that closely at it to confirm the crap they sold you has made YOUR crap any better. And the health "insurance" that is for sale out there is in many cases is no better than the colon cleansers, both are just fraud with different packaging.
I think that we have reached the point that the scammers know that no one will go after them any more. The entire economy is now rigged and any scam against the average person is now "legal" and acceptable. The only mistake Bernie Madoff made was to swindle some rich people. If he made his money off of payday loans to the poor, or sold crap insurance to the working class sick, he could have become just has rich and stayed out of jail too.
Your first sentence says it all, in a nutshell, likeitornot. Had Obama really been interested in drafting and implementing a serious healthcare reform plan, he and his Administration in Washington and the Democrats in Congress would've scrapped this toxic warmed-over 1990's GOP-written bill, gone back to the drawing board, and created a true healthcare reform plan that entailed Single Payer with Universal Healthcare and Medicare for all Americans instead of taking Single Payer off the table the minute Obama took office. Equally, if not more disgracefully, Obama allowed abortion rights to be taken off the table in order to get this toxic GOP-written "Healthcare reform" bill passed. As disgusting as it is, it's not surprising that he did that.
"It begins to look however as if the progressive community and even liberals did not listen. They still show the arrogance of self interest and obfuscation of real problems by dening tyhey exist."
Not sure what you mean here.
If you go back and look at commondreams, or any other liberal blog, or any progressive/liberal media of any sort, there was a huge debate in the liberal community about obama care; a lot of lib/progressive types, like myself, thought it sucked, but sucked less the alternatives (that we got sucky reform is due in large part to spineless reps like wiener in NY and B sanders; where on earth were these guys when it actually mattered - they talked big, but did nothing)
Dennis K. summed up the kleptocratic "health care" BS very well, right before the infamous ride on AF-1 with the puppet-emperor.
As Dennis and ohters here noted: the bill was complet BS smoke and mirrors and amounted to 100s of billions MORE PROFITS for an already bloated necrophagist insurance industry.
Meanwhile, the dystopia deepens
One cannnot expect less than corrupt legislation, from a corrupt system. One would have thought that when any alternative was "off the table" from the get go, should have got a clue. Collective Stockholm Syndrome is deep-seated in this country
The only question is why the hell did Dennis Kucinich back down and vote for that toxic "healthcare reform" bill? I've always liked Dennis Kucinich, but he made a really stupid move when he did that.
In true Godfather style Obama made Kucinich an offer he couldn't refuse when they met in private on Obama's 747.
Pfffffft! How disgusting! Why didn't Dennis Kucinich have the guts to say no?
Why didn't Obama and the Democratic Party have the guts to demand single payer? And why did they choose Kucinich to put in the hot seat - to be the patsy who would be blamed for every failure the Democrats would experience?
If you think Kucinich is disgusting, what word would you use for the people who promised to support single payer then purposefully took it off the table?
And, would "disgusting" be a strong enough word for what Obama and the Democratic Party would do to and say about Kucinich as soon as they could blame him and him alone for their failure?
I think that if we had elected Kucinich President he would have pushed for single payer. My question is, why didn't the Democratic Party have the guts to say no to the conversion to a corporatocracy?
Your points are well taken, recapitulationistUU.
I agree that Obama and the Democratic Party totally screwed everybody by promising to implement single payer with universal healthcare/medicare for all Americans and then took it off the table the minute he took office. I don't think Obama was totally gutless..he knew exactly what he was doing when he reneged on Single Payer.
No, disgusting's not a strong enough word at that point to describe Obama and the Democratic Party at large, but I still wonder why Kucinich didn't stand up to them.
Of all the things in this article, the only one I know anything about is medicare in NY State.
The author blasts NY for cutting medicaid , yet if you know anything about this , you know that NY spends way way to much to deliver poor quality service.
I don't know what the right answer is, but the author's simplification really results in him getting it wrong; I hope the rest of this article is better
For a brief 6 months, (about 10 years ago) my family had Medicaid. Best insurance I've ever had as an adult. What a joke our private insurance plan is, immunizations which are required by law to send children to public school, are not covered.
I kind of hope that the Obama plan is a complete failure and public outcry finally creates Health Care for all.
The health care scam -- the central Big Lie in the Even Bigger Lie of "change we can believe in" -- is nothing less than a U.S. variant of the Final Solution.
No death camps yet -- that would be too internationally embarrassing -- but abandonment, neglect and denial of health care serve the same purpose: methodical extermination of anyone who is no longer exploitable for capitalist profit.
Thus the targets are those of us who are elderly, disabled, long-term unemployed or otherwise chronically poor -- capitalism's surplus population, now deemed worthless liabilities rather than assets of human capital.
Anyone who doubts this is the case is either delusional or stupid.
The same is true of anyone who believes Obama -- Barack the Betrayer -- wasn't in on the scam from the very beginning.
Note how -- by infuriating both the Left and the Right -- the Betrayer not only re-animated the Republican Party but ensured capitalism's stranglehold on what remained of U.S. democratic process is literally forever. Now -- thanks to Obama's treachery -- all the Ruling Class need do is wait until the realities of poverty (including the denial of health care) either kill us or terrify the survivors into submission.
Meanwhile -- if Wisconsin is to be more than just a flash in the proverbial pan of history -- we need a nationwide political-education and organizing campaign the likes of which the U.S. hasn't seen since the heyday of the Communist Party during the 1930s.
And that ain't happening.
Part of the problem is there's nobody who has the will and knowledge to do the teaching and organizing.
The Democrats won't do it; despite their deceptive rhetoric, they're ultimately no different from the Republicans in obedient service to capitalism, including enactment of deliberately murderous socioeconomic policies: note how the Democrats have eagerly joined the war on Medicare and Social Security.
Meanwhile the union rank and file -- which increasingly has the requisite anger and solidarity (though probably not the teaching skills) -- is held in check by leadership that is shackled to Wall Street by lifestyle choices and pension plans and is therefore as compromised as the politicians themselves.
What we need is a miracle -- which alas is something that happens only in theology and other more entertaining forms of fiction.
Most lucid post on cd in months.
Dr. Marcia Angell said it better than anybody on Bill Moyers -- this legislation would begin to unravel almost immediately. Here's a refresher course on what she said:
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/dr-marcia-angell-tells-bill-moyers-ob
I am tempted to write to Senator Sanders and let him know what is going on with health care centers on Long Island. I just heard this morning that they are thinking of closing down the Coram Health Care Center (Else Owens). This is my only source of decent, affordable health care (sliding scale) being uninsured. It is also one of the major places that people on Medicaid go to. Indeed, it is a better than the crap services that people who buy into Healthy New York get.
One of the only reasons Sanders signed Obama's bill was the expansion of community health care centers. So let's say they close down centers in some parts of the country, like mine, but others get centers -- I guess it's a wash -- my loss, your gain, but no expansion -- sum zero.
So I finally broke down in tears over this. You know, it's like all you have left is this threadbare rug that you're trying to hold onto and then that gets yanked out from under your feet. We're awash in Immediate Medicare Care centers, but they're at least $80 a pop just to shake hands with the doc, and I have never been impressed by the manner of the docs in these places. The minute they find out you have no insurance -- well, condescending is the nicest term I can think of!
"....That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." --your Declaration of Independence
The "health care law" SHOULD be repealed but not for the reasons the rabid republicans say. It should be repealed because it's nothing more than a band-aid solution that prostitutes to the HMOs.
Until you americans grow a pair and demand universal single payer health care, your people will continue to die needlessly.
I pay $108 / month for full family health care... If I am sick or injured, a visit to the doctor or hospital costs me nothing. The care is excellent. Sure, for elective surgeries there's a wait list... but these things are prioritized by seriousness, as they should be. NOBODY is ever denied care.
FYI. The United States is the only "Western industrialized nation" without Universal Health care.
For a country that is supposedly made up of tough, hardworking people, you're sure a bunch of pussies when it comes to standing up to the government. You really need to take a lesson from the French or the Greeks. When the government screws with them, there's riots in the streets.
at
"Single Payer Action" website:
http://www.singlepayeraction.org/index.php
check out the short video of John Conyers explaining why he supportsObamaCare, even though he said he would never sign it.
Conyers claims that had ObamaCare not passed, it would take another 10 years to devise another, better single payer system. What? How long did it take them to devise Obama's plan? We know the major elements were decided long before the dog and pony show went on the air.
It's clear, these people are not our friends. They work against our interests and assume we don't know that or think there will always be clever ways to continue the scam, where we lose and the rich win. The majority of Americans preferred a strong public option or single payer but we got sh-- shoved down our throats instead.