Why Single Payer was never on the Table

[PHIMG]

A reason they wouldn't allow for it is because they don't want to open Pandora's box.

When they say Single Payer isn't politically viable they really mean that the Democratic Party won't be politically viable if they go for single payer. They will lose all the campaign donations they get from the PROFIT Driven elements of our healthcare system (the very elements who are destroying our healthcare system - big pharma, big investor owned hospitals, and the insurance company jackals.)

If Congress had taken a serious look at Single Payer they would have widely publicized the selling points of single payer, and exposed the beltway consensus plan for the expensive joke it is.


Single Payer:

1. Saves billions in eliminated waste. $180-300 billion a year. That is money that will not need to be raised in new taxes. Single Payer is the most fiscally conservative reform plan there is.

2. Single Payer gives 100% of Americans a Cadillac plan. Not tied to your employer. No deductibles, no copayments, no guessing what is covered or what is not covered, no need to consult a list of providers to see where you can go. No claim denials. No murder by spreadsheet.

Let's contrast that to the consensus plan.


PAY-TO-PLAYer Healthcare Reform:
(aka Mandate and Subsidize)

1. Force every American to buy a defective financial product from big insurance (which are basically Wall Street firms)

2. Add more toothless, hard to enforce regulations for the insurers, increasing complexity and costs.

3. Allow insurers to continue to offer "affordable" Pinto plans that leave you vulnerable to bankruptcy, deny claims, find new ways to screw over small community hospitals, deny care to patients, tie up doctors in red tape, etc.

4. Shovel trillions of tax payer dollar subsidies to the hugely profitable big insurers.

The consensus plan is another bail out for the Financial Sector and it is a SCANDAL that this has been foisted upon the Democratic party by Wall Street and it is a scandal that so many "Good" Democrats just went along with this for the sake of "unity".

So now you see why Baucus had to avoid these comparisons by taking single payer off the table and having the Baucus 8 arrested.

[Sherman A1]

1. Agreed

[MadBadger]

2. No, they mean it isnt viable because there isnt enough support for it

Not all Democrats think alike, and there are probably at least ten democrats in the senate that dont agree with single-payer.

[Winterblues]

3. They are probably the only ten "Democrats" in the entire USA that don't want Universal health care

:shrug: And they happen to sit in the US Senate.

[MadBadger]

5. There are a lot more conservative Democrats than you think

[CoffeeCat]

12. This is what is wrong with America!

Since when is universal health care some kind of anti-conservative, liberal idea?

We are the ONLY industrialized country on the entire planet, that does not have universal
healthcare.

This is not a liberal idea or a conservative idea.

The corporations in this country, have manipulated the debate. Universal healthcare is
"socialist" or "liberal" and a corporate-centric, wasteful, broken system is optimal
and "conservative". Oh please.

Believing that universal healthcare is "liberal" or "socialist" or the rest of the other
fear-mongering monikers, is to rely on propaganda from the insurance companies who pervert
these definitions to maintain their billions in profits.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[backscatter712]

8. As opposed to waiting months or years for treatment in the US

or getting it denied altogether?

The "horror stories" the GOP spreads around about the UK's or Canada's health care system are grossly exaggerated. The truth is that if the UK or Canadian governments chose to end their single-payer programs, there'd be riots in the streets.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Winterblues]

16. Tell me what it is that you like about our system that is in contrast to either Canada or the UK's

and they are not the same systems by the way. The UK's is a single payer system and Canada's is more like the Public Option. Both Conservatives and Liberals in both of those countries love their systems. But anyway explain IYO why ours is superior. I truly would be interested since my wife's insurance just had a thirty percent increase, and no indication the increases will ever stop.

[PHIMG]

46. WRONG.

UK is nearly a fully socialized system - the government owns the hospitals and runs them.

Canada is a single payer system. Publicly Funded, privately delivered. The hospitals and clinics are privately owned and operated.

In the USA we have a socialized system - the VA system, which has some of the best outcomes in any type of healthcare system in the USA and high customer satisfaction rates despite being targeted for de-funding by Republicans for years.

An example of a single payer type system in the USA is Medicare, the healthcare entitlement for those over 65.

[brentspeak]

17. Funny. I know lots of Canadians, and they wouldn't trade their system for the world

Whose research did you read? The Heritage Foundation's?

[polly7]

30. Probably from the Fraser Institute. Our own privatization bullshit spreader. nt.

[Grey]

19. But, Vincna, I am Canadian and

I don't do gop talking points. Wait times I hear about in the US, are just nasty.

PS, I have a large family down there and several died because they couldn't afford the doctor or the medication, several are living 'on the edge' for the same reason.

[DKRC]

22. Great! Love to see your research

Gimme a few links.

Thanks!

[Raineyb]

27. You should take your own advice.

(And stop reading right wing drivel at that) because Canadians love their system and wouldn't trade it for ours.

Two of my adult sisters live in Europe and they wouldn't think of coming here to live. Our mess of a health care system is part of that reason. My father, who was in the Air Force for 20 years and a Republican thinks people in this country have lost their damn minds. He pays a lot less for his health care than I do and he doesn't have to worry about getting care. (He's in Holland)

People are not decrying single payer so they can get our craptabulous system. Contrary to some people's beliefs this country does not do everything the best. We would do well to learn from other countries instead of being so arrogant as to think that everyone wants to be just like us.

[lib_wit_it]

63. Oh, so you hate America! Well, Love it or Leave it! (Sarcasm, in case it's not obvious.)

[eridani]

34. So why don't the conservative parties there have abolishing single payer in their platforms? n/t

[JetCityLiberal]

40. Great question, I'd like to hear their answer to that

:thumbsup:

Paul

[eridani]

58. I should think that would be obvious

They don't do it because they'd never win an election again.

[laughingliberal]

21. Yeah, those who promote those RW talking points about Canada

seem unaware of how many of the insured in this country get care denied by the money grubbers in our for-profit industry. When they can't outright deny care they will keep delaying as long as possible and hope you die before they are forced to cover it. No system is perfect but ours is the very worst in the developed world. People in other countries report varying degrees of satisfaction with their health care systems but they are unanimous on one point-they don't want ours. And that's not to mention the wait time for the uninsured is forever.

[Mimosa]

57. ^ SO TRUE, LL ^

You stole my avatar! *kidding you*

[muffin1]

10. Rent "Sicko". n/t

[Grey]

15. Not true, Vincna, Sorry.

Waiting months for treatment is a myth, if you need replacement parts, yes, that takes longer.

[FLDCVADem]

28. I'm not in favor of single payer either

I am in favor of a buy-in to Medicare for anyone that wants it.

[eridani]

35. Medicare IS a single payer system

Don't tell us you're one of those whackdoodles who want to "get the government out of their Medicare."

[FLDCVADem]

37. No, Medicare is not single payer

If it were true single payer, all people over 65 would have to use it, and that is not the case. Medicare is an insurance program administered by the government, nothing more, nothing less. No one is required to use it for their health care. Under a true single payer system, there would be no choice.

I'm all for allowing anyone that WANTS to enroll in Medicare and pay the premiums do so, regardless of age or health status, but I'm not in favor of a single payer system.

And no, I'm not a whackdoodle, just an informed consumer.

[eridani]

38. You can opt out of single payer systems n/t

[FLDCVADem]

39. Example please

If you can opt out, it's not really a single payer system.

[PHIMG]

48. You can opt out by paying out of pocket.

And even in UK with thier fully socialized healthcare system you can buy a private insurance plan. So then do we not call UK a socialized medicare state?

Single Payer generally means publicly funded and privately delivered.

Yes a true single payer would have only 1 insurance company and nobody would be allowed to pay for medical services out of pocket. This exists nowhere in the world.

A medicare buy in would be a good first step but lets not get hung up over semantics.

Medicare is an example of a single payer system, the key feature being publicly funded and privately delivered.

[FLDCVADem]

66. Unless I'm mistaken

You can't opt out in Canada and pay cash out of pocket.

And you can call it single payer all you like, but Medicare isn't.

As I said, I'm all for making Medicare available to anyone that wants to pay the premiums, but I have no desire to be under a single payer system.

[polly7]

29. And most of those stories are bullshit.

There are wait times for elective surgeries, I told my primary doctor I was having headaches lately, I have a C/T scan scheduled for next week. Guess what, it won't cost me a cent above what I already contribute through income tax. Neither will the surgery I believe will follow.

On the other hand, I have heard of horrendous wait times there for non-elective procedures, not sure how many are true or not.

[Edweird]

41. All I've heard, directly from Canadians I know personally and trust, are good things.

Is it perfect? Of course not. But what they have is better than ours by many orders of magnitude. So much so, that the fate of the senate bill will likely determine whether or not I apply for emigration to Canada.

[PHIMG]

45. 45,000 die every year in USA because of lack of healthcare

Is that not a horror story for you?

[lib_wit_it]

64. 45,000 die every year in USA because of lack of health care!

I just wanted to repeat that fact. This is the true terrorism we should be all freaking over. Not to say any terrorism is OK, but it's ridiculous how none of the RWers so concerned with "terrorism" don't give a shit if their fellow Americans die because they are without health insurance. Just more RW hypocrisy--or idiocy. Either is equally probable.

[Better Believe It]

31. So the only "viable" alternative is the Private Insurance Industry and Big Pharma Protection Act?

[MadBadger]

33. Public Option is viable through reconciliation

I dont think Single Payer could get a simple majority.

[PHIMG]

50. It would be called : "Medicare for All"

And to vote against it would be political suicide. It might not pass but in the next Congress it would.

BTW Single Payer has passed both houses of California's legislature like 3x's now.

California is a leading indicator of where politics is going in the USA.

[bvar22]

42. Then make them an "offer they can't refuse".

Obama & Rahm KNOW how to do that.
They came out of Chicago.

NO.

If they aren't pressuring them to go with Single Payer.
it is because they do not want Single Payer.

[paulk]

47. seems like the OP tries to explain "why" there isn't

enough support. I mean, we all already know that there "isn't enough support for it".

The only real support comes from the American people, and we all also know that they are pretty much at the bottom of the list when it comes to influencing our politicians, Republican or Democrat.

[Bonn1997]

67. There are no conservatives and liberals in Congress IMO...

at least not in the *principled* sense that most people use the terms. There are simply greedy individuals who will argue conservative or liberal points because doing so gets them the most campaign contributions

[frazzled]

4. It wasn't about the merits or demerits of single-payer at all

It was about the fact that a massive employer-based program had been in place for decades and decades in this country, and a huge private insurance system that would have to be entirely liquidated--together with the fact that, of the 85% of Americans who get their insurance through their jobs, the vast majority seem for some reason to like it and want to keep it. It was politically untenable to pass an all-at-once change from employer-based/private to single payer because people are afraid of even the smallest changes.

[tavalon]

7. Nothing like another form of wage slavery

I hate where I work but I get health insurance.

[Echo In Light]

13. They're especially 'afraid' when they've been brainwashed to support systems that rape them.

[NorthCarolina]

20. The Insurance Companies would be selling "Supplemental Insurance" the same day

Single Payer took effect. They would hardly go away.

[eridani]

36. The reason most like their current insurance is that they are ignoramuses

If you've never been expensively sick, your opinion on your health insurance is worth about what your opinion of your fire extinguisher is worth. If you haven't really used either, that would be nothing. 5% of the population accounts for 50% of health costs, and 15% for 85% of costs. If you aren't in that demographic, you don't know shit.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

52. And they've never experienced health care overseas

I know a lot of well-traveled people, many of whom have had medical emergencies overseas.

The ones who were in Europe or Japan or even Costa Rica had high praise for their treatment and were amazed at how the treatment cost little or nothing.

[eridani]

59. Yep--we paid $25 American in 1996 for an emergency root canal

--in Groeningen, Netherlands. (100 guilders)

[PHIMG]

51. There is almost no basis at all for your assertions.

Except for some misleading polling done by a group hired to come up with pre-set conclusions, the very ones you spout off.

People hate private insurance, fewer and fewer people have employer based insurance and what it covers is less and less. Most people who are bankrupted from medical illness had employer based insurance.

Politicians like to play dumb about this so they can continue to defend the status quo but the American people are not ignorant to this and they want national healthcare even if it means thier taxes will go up.

[zipplewrath]

9. Shoulda CBO scored it

I would have love to see a truly honest CBO scoring of single payer. I'd a bet it would have blow the others way outta the water.

[Nite Owl]

24. That's why it was never scored

People aren't that dumb to realize that this is the way to save money and they would lose their talking points that it was 'too expensive'.

[Coyote_Bandit]

14. Really there are only a few reasons

why single payer wasn't on the table. Dem leaders who control the Presidency and majorities in both the House and the Senate:

(1) chose to be ill informed and not even permit evidence regarding the viability of a single payer plan;
(2) lacked a principled commitment to the physical welfare and the inherent right to life of all flesh and blood citizens; and
(3) lacked the leadership, political skill, and personal courage to enact a single payer plan.

Menaingful healthcare reform is my line in the sand. My personal circumstances are such that I do not have the luxury of waiting another 20 years for the issue to maybe be reconsidered. I'm going to be hard pressed to vote for any of these sorry bastards to retain their position. Their past conduct on this issue clearly demonstrates that their priorities lie somewhere other than protecting and advancing my own interests. Fuck 'em.

[Nite Owl]

25. I can't agree with #1

they weren't ill informed they just didn't like the truth.

[Upfront]

26. Also

many were paid not to want it. Follow the money.

[PHIMG]

53. Ding Ding Ding Ding!

And half of the staffers in Congress working on healthcare at one point worked for the insurers. No conflict there!

[Romulox]

18. In the SOTU, the Prez pretended that nobody had suggested Single Payer, PO to him...

What kind of democracy can we possibly have if the President can simply pretend away the will of the people?

And where is the media to call this guy out on anything? :shrug:

[glitch]

23. There is no media, only one big giant wurlitzer, set on one tune infinite loop repeat. nt

[amborin]

43. +1000

[PHIMG]

54. The media can only call him out on things that will push him to the RIGHT n/t

[hunter]

32. I think they are scared. You can't just hack off a tumor that big...

... when it's so entwined with every organ system.

It's going to take a very good surgeon to remove the cancerous health care industry without damaging our entire economy. On the other hand we have to remove it soon because it's already killing our economy.

[PHIMG]

55. They can cut it out like they cut out our Industiral base

The truth is the government would do a Leveraged Buy-out of the insurers and do an orderly phased wind down of the business, give the employees free job retraining, and 3 years of unemployment.

The private insurers are not the life blood of the economy they are leeches sucking the life blood out of the economy.

[alberg]

44. Keep pushing for it - eventually the $$ savings and quality of care will make it happen.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

49. They wouldn't get their customary bribes, but they'd get VOTES

They keep forgetting that that's what they really need--loyal voters, not money, if they can get the voters some way other than expensive campaigns.

[Faryn Balyncd]

56. k and r

[suede1]

60. Yep! K & R

[andym]

61. I believe the main reason single payer was not on the table was lack of courage about cost

Single payer as described in HR676 will stimulate the economy, create new jobs and save hundreds of billions from indirect costs according the CA Nurses' study. Americans on average will pay less for health care. American workers would be competitive.

However, according to the CA nurses study it would cost about $2 trillion/year in direct costs (savings come from lower indirect costs). That compares with a total federal budget last year of 2.9 trillion, so it increases the budget by 69% to 4.9 trillion. It would increase the deficit by 2 trillion/year unless various tax increases are passed.

For comparison the Senate/House HCR bills cost about 90 billion/year. So single payer costs about 20 times more.

It would take immense political courage on the part of congress to create such a big program and the taxes necessary to pay for it. I have yet to see such courage outside a few state houses, like in California which is about to again try to pass a version of single-payer.

[WonderGrunion]

62. Which 50 Senators would vote for a single payer plan?

I support single payer. I think that the nationalization of health care would be the biggest boon to small business in the history of the country.

But it cannot pass this current Senate. Until we elect a more liberal Senate, we have to settle for the measures that we can currently get. You may think it sucks. I think it sucks. But I'm not going to deny coverage to 30 million Americans and prevent massive regulation of the insurance industry just because it is not the best plan out there.

[Kaleva]

65. Isn't Sanders, an Independent, the only Senator who pushed for a single payer system?