Time Has Come for Single-Payer Universal Health Care System

[babylonsister]

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/01/27-3

Time Has Come for Single-Payer Universal Health Care System

by Nick Metel

snip//

There are alternatives to a health care system that allows insurers to realize unprecedented profit and enforce extraordinary premiums, all the while labeling more and more individuals unprofitable and therefore uninsurable. There are models of health care systems proven time and again to be much more successful in health care outcomes than ours. But these models do not embrace a profit motive, and in fact spurn the idea of capitalizing on our unhealthy mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters and, most of all, children. Therefore, it is no surprise such models are vilified by the mega-capitalists among us.

The solution is a complete paradigm shift away from a profit- driven model in the health care sector to a single-payer system. The trail leading us to this solution has already been blazed, and America is ready to take the first step. Public opinion polls show upward of 68 percent of citizens support such a shift, while 51 percent of American physicians are in favor of implementation of a single-payer system.

Proposals have been drafted, including the much-discussed plan by the Physicians' Working Group for Single-Payer National Health Insurance and U.S. Rep. John Conyers' United States National Health Insurance Act (H.R. 676).

The wheel need not be reinvented, but a simple step forward must be taken.

The benefits are many and widespread. Immediately upon implementation, the number of uninsured men, women and children in Indiana alone would drop from an estimated 871,000 to zero. Nationally, the seemingly ever-increasing number of 47 million uninsured Americans would finally drop to the number our collective moral conscience should demand: zero. The health of our citizens would increase drastically, as all would finally be able to care for their health. The choice of provider would be taken out of the hands of the insurer and returned to its rightful owner - the individual. Health and well-being would trump profit, and in an economy where job certainty is floundering, the certainty of health coverage will not.

The time has come to take that long-overdue progressive step forward and implement a single-payer universal health care model in America. The time has come for our leaders to ensure that no citizen is ever again added to the list of those who have died due to a lack of health coverage, a list that adds 18,000 names each year, according to the Institute of Medicine. The administration of hope and change is in place, and therefore the question must be asked: If not finally this administration, then who? And if not now, when?

[aquart]

1. Yes.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

2. I wish we could have a healthcare system like the UK

[Warpy]

4. I'd rather have Canada's.

The UK has a two tier system, one for the well off and insured and the public health service for everybody else. The problem is that the national health service gets a little more underfunded every year by the rich and powerful who inhabit the halls of Parliament.

We need one system covering all of us. The wealthy who resent rubbing elbows with the rest of us can schedule their care in medical palaces in India and Thailand. The rest of us will be sure of a well funded system that even the wealthy will need to use in an emergency.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

5. I would go for what the French have, UK's has issues and Canada's is unacceptable

[Rosa Luxemburg]

6. like the UK system without the option to go private

I tend to go to univesity hospitals and dental school where you feel that the docs and dentists are there to treat not for money. So many PCPs and specialists in the USA are out to make money. In the UK docs should be pevented from doin 'private' work aswell as their NHS jobs.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

7. Private options are needed. Just ask the Canadians who come to the US for it

Its also the American way. There is just too much elective surgery to not allow some private options.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

10. I don't agree. There is no need for privileged private healthcare

the rich pay more through their salaries. The elderly, disabled and unemployed should go free.

I HATE PRIVATE HEALTHCARE. My mother waited for 2 years to get here cataracts done at a local hospital when she lived in the south of England. Rumor had it that the eye doctor spent 2 weeks private, 2 weeks national health. When she contacted her MP he exposed the consultant. It was also found that he was playing golf for the remainder of the time. Healthcare systems in each country have flaws but providing citizens are proactive and there are auditing systems then we should be home and dry.

I personally don't think we complain enough. The amount of people who are faced with $50,000 bills for treatment and lie down like lambs and try to pay it. They should lie down in the road and hold up the traffic!!

I took my case of my health insurance not paying for my support stockings to our state legislature. The HMO suddenly decided to pay up.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

14. There are things that public systems will not cover that should be available

its one of the primary lessons from the Canadian system

[Rosa Luxemburg]

15. public systems should cover it and it should be available to all

not just the ones who can afford it or want to use private healthcare.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

16. So a public system should cover botox, tummy tucks, face lifts, and mamoplasty?

Or are you suggesting that those surgeries and other purely cosmetic treatments not be available

[Rosa Luxemburg]

18. public should cover items that are medically necessary

the rest are cosmetic not health

[ProgressiveProfessor]

26. Then you have violated your prior position...

If there is to be NO private care available, then elective procedures (including cosmetic ones) will not be possible. If you think it should be allowed on a privately funded basis, then private practice will still be available.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

28. cosmetic is not considered medical

we are talking about healthcare not beauty! No doctor will be doing cosmetics in the new health system!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

32. They are medical procedures just not medically necessary ones.

Any plan which tosses away all of elective procedures away will never pass, cosmetic or otherwise. If you don't understand why, look up Roe v Wade

[Rwalsh]

31. If those procedures

are necessary to improve a person's mental health, then yes.

Let's not limit our definition of "medically necessary" to only improving a person's physical health. Improving a person's mental health is just as important.

You can't have one without the other. They're intertwined. Mind affects body and vice versa.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

33. Within reason, I agree, but the hard part is what is reasonable.

The real issue is Canadian style no private system or not and its clear such a severe approach will not work in the US. There will have to be private options available. From there it gets sticky.

[eridani]

20. Yes, available on your own dime

I expect the same fire engine that Bill Gates would get if my house was on fire. However, the fact that he can probably afford an expensive sprinkler system and alarm that I can't afford doesn't bother me.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

27. Which ishow it is today

The prior poster was arguing for a no private care at all approach. One that is clearly flawed.

[eridani]

35. The prior poster was arguing nothing of the sort

Providers under single payer will continue to be private. It is the INSURANCE which will be nationalized and not for profit.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

36. Thats is not what was said in #28 You are correct about the OP

Rosa however is much harder over

[cabluedem]

29. How about dental, since dental issues can directy affect the body itself?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

34. Good point which makes it even more complicated

much of dentistry is in part cosmetic.

[leftstreet]

3. K&R

[formercia]

8. It's called Medicaid

all the feds need to do is expand it in size and transfer the Social Security namebase onto their computers and we would be all covered.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

11. Medicaid needs expanding but it needs to be overhauled and made cost effective

remake, remodel......

The whole system needs changing. We need to expand primary care so that PCPs can treat urgent care and emergencies. I was impressed at my former PCP in WA who was able to do almost everything. He delivered our babies, he did skin surgery, he did vein surgery, backed up with nurses, midwives. There was no need to go to an expensive og/gyn or dermatologist.

We NEED to take emergency care back to the PCPs. It is more cost effective. This area needs to be expanded.

[demodonkey]

23. Have you ever had to apply for Medicaid? It is a degrading process that violates your privacy and...

...destroys your self-esteem. You work all your life, then get a stroke or some other disabling illness, and tough luck. You need ongoing care after your insurance or Medicare runs out? Too bad. Your fault. Welcome to the wonderful world of Medicaid and nursing homes.

You get to "spend down" everything you ever worked for before you get any help. Every transaction you made for the last 5 years is scrutinized by some state-paid paper pusher. Gave a little money to your grand kid for college, or donated to your church or a political candidate you believe in? Well, tough, you don't qualify. Your privacy (and your family's privacy) is GONE, and your right to use your income and assets to "pursue happiness" as you see fit is GONE too.

If you have to apply for Medicaid and get into a nursing home, everything you have now BELONGS to the state, except you can keep $45 a month for your "personal needs." That means $45 to pay for all your clothes, shampoo, hair care, glasses, shoes, reading material, phone, etc. If you are lucky, you will have family who will help by buying the things you need for you, but if you are alone you might have to wear junk clothes that the staff buys for a few pennies at thrift stores. (These rarely fit, or look nice, after all you are just an old senile bag of bones waiting to die anyway.) You need to give your money to the for-profit nursing home so they can increase their bottom line, not buy decent well fitting clothes, shoes, and glasses.

My family is facing this process right now and IT STINKS. It is inhuman, and should be considered UNAMERICAN. But sadly, our "American Way" is to turn our back on the old, the sick and the disabled.

Single payer health care would cover these things for everyone. No more old people wearing rags in nursing homes after their life's work and savings has been stolen from them to pay for so-called "care".

Single payer health care for all. We can't afford NOT to do this.

[formercia]

25. That's why Medicaid needs to be modified.

It was purposely made that way by conservatives to prevent anyone with any income or property from qualifying. I was on it for about a Year. You are right about how degrading it is.

That can all be changed with some regulation changes. The point I was trying to make is that the basic infrastructure is already in place. Change a few regs to include everyone. At least people won't lose their home because of a catastrophic illness. Get rid of the regs that make people have to spend down to nothing.

If physicians don't want to go along, there's always folks who can afford their own private plan.

[cabluedem]

30. Perhaps we should take the fatally ill, the old and the senile and put them on a raft out to sea,...

that way at least we would all know what a bunch of childish turncoats and uncivilized barbarians we have become. :sarcasm:

This is America, circa 2009 ?

Someone pinch me: I think I am having a nightmare!

[Moostache]

9. I wonder how different it would be if...

the insurance company executives, CEOs and board of directors had to answer the phones all day or meet face to face everyday with the human beings that they deny the right to available medical care because of profit.

Profiting, and not only profiting but doing so specifically by choosing who lives and who faces death based solely on the number of zeroes in their bank account is sub-human. It was a different story in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, before modern-medicine was available. In those days, people died of untreated medical conditions not because of a lack of funds but because of a lack of knowledge....the HUMAN RACE has gained great knowledge over the last 80 years...and not one, not a single one of the CEO's or heads of insurance companies or shareholders contributed ANYTHING to the advancement of that collective knowledge.

Yet, when it comes time to try to steal money by exploiting this collective knowledge, they are all over that like wolves on meat. If there is an angle to play, loophole to exploit, a patient to deny coverage on a technicality, you can bet on them to be on the morally questionable side of every decision. I have often wondered why we charge doctors several hundred thousand dollars to earn an MD, force them to go through the Hippocratic Oath and internships and residencies only to turn around and hand over the diagnosis and treatment regiments to some desk jockey in a corporate office center thousands of miles away?

Remove the middle man - Single Payer Health Care NOW!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

12. the answer is that there should be no insurance companies!

insurance companies don't belong in our healthcare system. Healthcare should be free at the point of use and we can fine tune healthcare 'taxes' through our wages - the rich paying more out of their salaries.

In a transition period, insurance companies could merge with state healthcare agencies keeping jobs and be revamped to serve the public. That is, no more profit for themselves. The profit is fed back into the state healthcare budget. The price hospitals charge for procedures is ridiculous!

[Frisbee]

13. I think a shift to a single payer system...

would do as much to restore our economy as anything the government has done to date or has on the table. This would remove such a burden for businesses large and small, that I imagine it would have a noticeable effect on employment numbers as well as allowing some businesses teetering of the edge a change to survive. You are right Babylon, if not now, when. My guess is if not now, perhaps not in my lifetime. And that would be a tragedy.

[Politicalboi]

17. Until we get our immigration laws

In order we are never going to get a good medical system. This is why it works in other countries. It's for their citizens only.

[eridani]

21. Not true. I know people who have gotten free care in Britain

They are just directed to make donations to some sort of hospital research or support funds if they want to pay.

[Raster]

19. Healthcare insurance organizations = parasites.

Any questions?:kick:We Can Do Better!

[Enthusiast]

22. Rec. and +1, Raster!

There is no justification for the insurance industry taking profits for simply moving paper. They provide zero healthcare. The only ones involved with our healthcare should be ones providing actual care and a bare bones administrative company-organization. Maybe we could outsource administration to India, lol.

[demodonkey]

24. 2 weeks ago, I ate peanut crackers before I knew they were recalled. Have been sick ever since.

I have been having every symptom of salmonella poisoning, but no coverage means I can't go to the doctor because I don't have a spare $100 that it costs to walk in the door (or $1000 or more if I go to an ER.) I have been doing my best to treat myself, take it easy, and hope I get better soon.

If I did get poisoned by salmonella, my case should be documented and the data get to the CDC so they can use the information to help trace this outbreak with the peanut products.

But because I have no coverage and can't afford a doctor that isn't happening. PUBLIC HEALTH information is being lost because people are uninsured.