

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Mark Almberg, Physicians for a National Health Program,
(312) 782-6006, cell: (312) 622-0996,
mark@pnhp.org
Canada's publicly funded health insurance program known as medicare "is one of the best health care systems in the world," a leading U.S. health policy expert says, but is being threatened by government underfunding and by those who would partially privatize it under the guise of reducing wait times for elective medical procedures.
Dr. Marcia Angell, a senior lecturer at Harvard Medical School, writes in the Oct. 21 issue of the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) that Canada's health expenditures are half those in the United States - US$3,326 per person versus US$6,697. Yet, in sharp contrast to the U.S., Canada's health system guarantees essential medical care to all of the country's residents.
In addition, Angell says, since the full implementation of medicare in 1972, Canada's medical outcomes have surpassed those of the U.S. "The life expectancy of Americans is now 2.5 years shorter than that of Canadians," she writes. "Infant mortality rates are higher in the U.S., as is preventable mortality (death before the age of 75 from diseases that are amenable to treatment)." Americans also visit their doctors much less often than their Canadian counterparts.
Saying the only plausible explanation for the U.S. spending more and getting less than Canada is that the U.S. system is "enormously inefficient," an inefficiency that stems from relying "primarily on private, largely investor-owned corporations to provide health care."
These for-profit health insurance companies, hospitals, and "satellite businesses that have sprung up around the health care industry" like drug-management companies, utilization review companies and billing agencies siphon off about 31 percent of all health care spending in the U.S. for administrative costs, marketing and profits, she says.
By contrast, she writes, Canada's public system and the U.S. Medicare system incur administrative costs of 2 percent or less.
The main charge leveled against Canada's system is that it requires excessive wait times, particularly for elective procedures, Angell says.
Waiting times are a concern, she says. Some waits were lengthened when Canada adopted a 1984 law that essentially abolished user fees and extra charges. To compensate, system administrators tried to contain costs by controlling the supply of services like imaging and the use of surgical facilities, leading to longer waits.
Wait times also increased in the 1990s, when the Canadian system was badly underfunded. The funding became a political issue, and while subsequent funding improved the situation, today "waiting times are still too long for certain elective procedures, such as hip and knee replacements, and it takes time for increased funding to be translated into more facilities and specialists."
But waiting lists for these procedures are no reason to abandon what clearly amounts to a superior overall system of delivering health care, a system that provides essential health care to all based on medical need, not ability to pay, Angell says. Canadian medicare still remains popular with the public, she notes.
Those who say that privatizing part of Canada's system will reduce wait times have produced little evidence to back up their claim, she says. In fact, Angell believes the pressure to partially privatize the Canadian system has more to do with "the desire of businesses and some specialists to profit from the system, just as they do in the U.S.," combined with a desire on the part of federal and provincial governments to shift more health care costs onto individual patients.
Such steps toward privatization would backfire, she says, since "for-profit care is nearly always more expensive and often of lower quality."
Instead, she urges better funding for Canada's medicare. "The wisest course for Canada is to expand and reinforce its public system, not undermine it," Angell says.
Angell, the former editor-in-chief of The New England Journal of Medicine, notes that many Americans also appreciate the merits of a national health insurance system: "Polls have shown that about two-thirds of Americans would prefer a Canadian-style system, as would three-fifths of doctors."
Physicians for a National Health Program is a single issue organization advocating a universal, comprehensive single-payer national health program. PNHP has more than 21,000 members and chapters across the United States.
The president is trying to fire Fed Gov. Lisa Cook for alleged mortgage fraud. Critics say he's targeting another one of his political foes.
Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell reportedly plans to attend Wednesday's US Supreme Court oral arguments in the case involving President Donald Trump's attempt to fire Fed Gov. Lisa Cook.
A "person familiar with the matter" told the Associated Press on condition of anonymity that Powell would attend the high court session in the face of Trump's unprecedented effort to oust one of the seven members of the Fed's governing board.
Last August, Trump announced his termination of Cook—an appointee of former President Joe Biden—for alleged fraud, accusing her of signing two primary residence mortgages within weeks of each other. An investigation published last month by ProPublica revealed that Trump did the same thing that he's accusing Cook of doing.
Cook denies any wrongdoing, has not been charged with any crime, and has filed a lawsuit challenging Trump’s attempt to fire her. In October, the Supreme Court declined to immediately remove Cook and agreed to hear oral arguments in the case.
In what many critics allege is an attempt by Trump to strong-arm the Fed into further interest rate cuts, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) earlier this month served the central bank with grand jury subpoenas related to Powell's congressional testimony on renovations to Fed headquarters in Washington, DC.
Powell—who was nominated by Trump in 2017 and whose four-year term as Fed chair ends May 15—responded by alleging that “the threat of criminal charges is a consequence of the Federal Reserve setting interest rates based on our best assessment of what will serve the public, rather than following the preferences of the president."
"This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions—or whether instead monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation," he added.
Trump is trying to install his puppets at the Fed.First by trying to fire Lisa Cook and rushing in his top econ adviser.Now by abusing the law to try to push Jerome Powell out for good.Next he'll nominate a new Chair—and Trump says “anybody that disagrees" with him is out.
[image or embed]
— Elizabeth Warren (@warren.senate.gov) January 15, 2026 at 7:54 AM
In addition to Cook, Trump has targeted a number of Democrats with what critics say are dubious mortgage fraud claims.
Last November, a federal judge dismissed a DOJ criminal case against New York Attorney General Letitia James, who was charged with bank fraud and false statements regarding a property in Virginia. Critics called the charges against James—who successfully prosecuted Trump for financial crimes—baseless and politically motivated. A federal grand jury subsequently rejected another administration attempt to indict James.
The president has accused other political foes, including US Sen. Adam Schiff and Rep. Eric Swalwell—both California Democrats who played key roles in both of the president’s House impeachments—of similar fraud. Swalwell is currently under formal criminal investigation. Both lawmakers deny the allegations.
"Billionaires can’t be allowed to buy elections."
After flirting last year with forming his own political party, far-right billionaire Elon Musk is funding Republican political candidates once again.
Axios reported on Monday that Musk recently made a massive $10 million donation to bolster Nate Morris, a MAGA candidate who is vying to replace retiring US Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.).
Axios described the massive donation, the largest Musk has ever given to a Senate candidate, as "the biggest sign yet that Musk plans to spend big in the 2026 midterms, giving Republicans a formidable weapon in the expensive battle to keep their congressional majorities."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) reacted with disgust to the news, and said that Musk's enormous donation was indicative of a broken campaign finance system.
"Are we really living in a democracy when the richest man on earth can spend as much as he wants to elect his candidates?" Sanders asked in a social media post.
"The most important thing our nation can do is end Citizens United and move to public funding of elections," he added, referring to the 2010 Supreme Court decision that cleared the way for unlimited spending on elections by corporations. "Billionaires can’t be allowed to buy elections."
Democratic Maine State Auditor Matt Dunlap, currently running to represent Maine's second congressional district, also denounced Musk for throwing his weight around to buy politicians.
"Billionaires buy our elections, rig the tax code, and undermine our democracy," wrote Dunlap. "Working people deserve a government that works for them—not for billionaires like Elon Musk."
Musk is no stranger to spending big to help elect Republicans, having spent more than $250 million in 2024 to help secure President Donald Trump's victory.
However, his riches are no guarantee of a GOP win. Last year, for example, Musk spent millions to elect former Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel to a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court, only to wind up losing the race by 10 points.
"This is the third person who has died in the $1.24 billion privately-run facility that focuses on profits instead of meeting basic standards," said one lawmaker.
Officials in both Texas and Minnesota are calling for accountability and a full investigation into conditions at Camp East Montana, the sprawling detention complex at Fort Bliss in El Paso, Texas, following the third reported death at the facility in less than two months.
Victor Manuel Diaz, 36, was detained by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers in Minneapolis, where ICE has been carrying out violent immigration arrests, cracking down on dissent, and where one officer fatally shot a legal observer earlier this month.
He was one of roughly 2,903 detainees being held at Camp East Montana at Fort Bliss US Army base, one of the largest ICE detention centers in the country, on January 14 when contract security workers found him “unconscious and unresponsive” in his cell.
He was later pronounced dead and ICE released a statement saying he had died of "presumed suicide," but officials arre still investigating his cause of death.
Diaz's death comes days after it was reported that a medical examiner in Texas was planning to classify another death reported at Camp East Montana—that of Geraldo Lunas Campos—as a homicide.
A doctor said Lunas Campos' preliminary cause of death in early January was "asphyxia due to neck and chest compression." An eyewitness said he had seen several guards in a struggle with the 55-year-old Cuban immigrant and then saw guards choking Lunas Campos.
A month prior of Lunas Campos' death, 49-year-old Guatemalan immigrant Francisco Gaspar-Andres died at a nearby hospital; he was a detainee at Camp East Montana. ICE said medical staff attributed his death to "natural liver and kidney failure.”
Minnesota Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan called for a "complete and transparent investigation" into what happened to Diaz after his death was announced Sunday.
"We deserve answers," said Flanagan.
US Rep. Veronica Escobar (D-Texas), who last year expressed concern about the US government's deal with a small private business, Acquisition Logistics LLC, to run Camp East Montana, said the detention center "must be shut down immediately," warning that "two deaths in one month means conditions are worsening."
After the administration awarded a $1.2 billion contract to Acquisition Logistics to build and operate the camp, lawmakers and legal experts raised questions about the decision, considering the small company had no listed experience running detention centers, its headquarters was listed as a Virginia residential address, and the president and CEO of the company did not respond to media inquiries.
"It's far too easy for standards to slip," Escobar told PBS Newshour after touring the facility. "Private facilities far too frequently operate with a profit margin in mind as opposed to a governmental facility."
In September, ICE's own inspectors found at least 60 violations of federal standards, with employees failing to treat and monitor detainees' medical conditions and the center lacking safety procedures and methods for detainees to contact their lawyers.
Across all of ICE's detention facilities, 2025 was the deadliest year for immigrant detainees in more than two decades, with 32 people dying in the agency's centers.
After Diaz's death was reported Sunday, former National Nurses United communications adviser Charles Idelson said that "ICE detention centers are functioning like death camps."