"bonjour, un annuaire de vide dressing va sortir en décembre et vous pouvez déjà référencer vos blogs dessus gratuitement.C'est l'occasion de créer un peu de traffic sur vos sites. voici le lien : http://www.clic-dressing.fr
il sera bientôt possible de déposer vos ventes gratuitement et de faire votre shopping à travers les différentes page du site. N'hésitez pas à poster vos questions ou remarques à clic.dressing[at]gmail.com A+ Elodie"

I'm no economic genius but to save 30% on health care seems like a sale to me. If we don't do anything health care costs could climb to $38,000 for every family per year within 9 years. Americans are afraid of change and the words universal care scares the socialist out of them. Lets stop giving the insurance companies the big profits and lets get a healthcare system for everyone. What kind of people are we anyway to watch people lose everything and and watch people die for lack of health care. American get with it.

I believe that single payer, nationalized health care is the most sensible way to go, model it after the Canada system! Unfortunately, some people are of the belief that the for-profit insurance groups are the only answer and they have the only right to have the most say in how health care is implemented..

Take profitering out of health care, let me spend Blue cross and blue shields CEO bonuses on my patients in the form of education, testing and time to do my job which I love....being a Doctor.

Instead of thinking about the payers, we need to think about the care and the people as resources to be cared for.
If socialized medicine is good enough for the troops, it's good enough for me.
Draft the medical people into the military and be done with the debate.

Say "liability equity" not "tort reform". J. Durbin is correct in saying language (terms) can be prejudicial and cloud issues. By confounding the issue of increasing medical mistakes and incompetence with the way medical services are financed and delivered the vested interests have mis-stepped. To whom are doctors and hospitals paying inflated liability premiums: the same insurance corporations selling health care insurance. So in fact patients and providers have common opponents: Insurance corporations and incompetent practitioners.

How unjust it seems that tort reform caps judgments and limits filings for persons or groups irreparably harmed. Justice should exceed the market in importance because it improves conditions by taxing malfeasance and error, because it teaches good ethics and compels them in practice. In short, claims set a standard. Tort reform encourages neglect and mistakes, delays improved practice. Liability equity would regulate liability coverage instead, catching the real problem way upstream.

So many times the common good is asked to compromise with the common evil of concentrated wealth and power in our society. "No child left behind", the Bush era pharmaceutical bill for the elderly and now the flawed compromise in medical delivery reform haven't taught us a thing. Compromisers, like the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, do not serve our common interests as well as stubborn advocates. We need some form of universal comprehensive medical delivery system that excludes profit now. Including the insurance corporations negates reform and teaches all the wrong lessons. We could also include "liability equity" for practitioners and providers. That would be a good start toward a major change in attitude, greatly needed.

Paula Thoburn:

What you say is totally true. I cannot explain it better, the dictators only think of themselves and not about the people.
Why do everyday Americans don't realize this, are they too uninformed to understand what is done to them in the so-called Democratic country.

The rest of the world has this system.

Rush Lumbaugh said it correct. We are a capitalistic society and if normal day Americans don't realize this until it is too late. Who suffers?. The Dumb people.

Last night we watched “Sicko” for the first time we wanted to get HC in a nutshell; I tried to take all the left wing spin out of it and simply listened to all the stories. I am shocked, appalled and frankly thought "Do we ever learn"?

a brilliant attack on the wealthy, money, blinkers driven society.

If MM had Pitt/Jolie as spokes people, there would be a lot more people listening...

Bill, the perfect time to invite him to your journal, after the Clinton’s well intended national healthcare push (HR676)fail, he brilliantly picked up on that and tried to show us the ugly, money driven third world country we live in: the United States of America.

It would be a good time to go back to congress after some of them so enthusiasticly pick up on the movie... where are we now?

"Money, money, money its NOT funny in this broke ass land"

Thank you for having guests that can speak about health care plans without obfuscated insurannce industry jargon like saying "single payer" instead of "similar to Medicare and Medigap". The politicians are selling programs to each other and in their own obfuscated jargon. As an end user, please ask the politicians to tell me what the insurance policy covers and what the full premium is. Please! Otherwise they are not communicating in understandable terms. Also I am pretty sure the premium is not a trillion dollars per month per person...it is more like my medicare part B which is $97 per month. So why are the figures given to the end users that way? Medicare is not going broke in 10 years as Obama claims...we will elect presidents and congressmen that will raise the premiums to pay for what we need and tax the greedheads' windfall profits to pay for it. (Yes we can because it was us who did it.)

If US health insurance companies are superior why does Canada and England have higher life expectancy rates + better infant mortality rates than US.

John Steele Gordon is so very afraid of turning healthcare provision to the federal government, but he seems to have forgotten that federally run Medicare is more efficient than the private health insurance business.

Canadian single payer healthcare has better outcomes than the American system, with about half the cost.

Alan

Must be a doomsday predictor.

Hope you are wrong!!.

Even after exposing the truth through Wendel Potters interview, Americans still don,t get it.

To Joe:

your post June 28 refers. Did you watch the Obama Speech/.

I hope you got your answer.

>... ... geschafft!
>>Jawohl Herr Kapitaen,
das Schiff geht runter!
>Tja Kinder! Not before November and not for the
next thousand years
will there be
a new health care insurance
policy in these waters!

Torpedoing Health Care Reform:

>Herr Kapitaen, das Schiff ist da!
>>Sehr gut, alles in ordnung , we did the
new Harry and Louise, and we got scary
enough numbers screamed around so now the
governors are on our side too. Sehr gut!
Rohr eins fertigmachen!
>Rohr eins fertig! Herr Kapitaen!
>>This will be even easier than the last
engagement. They have even less spine than
Clinton. Rohr Zwei fertigmachen!
>Rohr zwei fertig! Herr Kapitaen!
>Torpedos .... LOS!

Why not change the entire for-profit health care system to an old-fashioned, SERVICE-based NON-PROFIT system? Do I want anyone in the industry, any of the players making decisions about my health care if they are (as now the case) influenced by a profit motive? No! I want them to make decisions purely on the basis of medical need. Well, that's a non-profit system!

Why is there no talk of this option?

Once again, Bill Moyers gets it right, and doesn't throw softballs to industry experts. But how do we win? How can we have the louder voice? And why do those who lie, deceive and cheat continue to prevail? Is it simply a case of better marketing of one faction over another, and if so, how do we get the truth out there? Who's listening? Who cares? Thanks, Bill, for all the great reporting you've done over the years. Keep up the brilliant work. We're counting on you.

To Regina, Pa:

I don't understand why people like you never seem to watch programs other than MTV.

This has been repeated over and over again: The Insurance companies and the the Republicans that don't want to change the system tell LIES. Every other CIVILIZED nation is having FREE medical aid. AMERICA and I mean North America is the only nation that is the richest but the middle-class and poor are not having health care. Have I said this for the LAST time.

It is obvious a national health care system is what is needed but America has evolved into a country of pure greed. It's sole being is the promotion of greed as proven in our financial markets and government lackys who suck up to the corporate monsters who rule the country. Until we can over come the yeser missa boss attitude and start kicking these bums out we cannot accomplish anything for average Americans. I just hope we have finally had enough this time and something can truely be done.

To Joe,

You have a choice, pay throught your nose like the rich people do, or follow the single payer system. Most Americans don't realize that you are "Hood-Winked" into believing by the "LOBBYISTS" THAT YOU HAVE A BETTER SYSTEM. Grow-up. The Middle-class and the poor who represent the majority of people, are struggling. Their finances are being drained by the co-operations that run the Healthcare system. The Government, if they are the government of the people will be monitered by rules and regulations. Only them, there will be No bailouts or exploitations of land management. In other countries,next time you visit, we have a 99 year lease on our houses, also, the tax never increases every year. The people in this country don't know any better, so they follow, like sheep to the slaughter.

YES, the U.S should pursue a single payer healthcare model, which is the ONLY system that can guarantee life time comprehensive healthcare for ALL.
Anything else is unacceptable!
It is also the most efficient system with low administrative cost, because the same coverage applies to every person. The cost is spread over the entire nation, and people pay according to ability via a percentage of income.

The most popular phrase against a single payer system is that it is "not politically feasible". When this nonsense comes from our elected officials, who are the ones who CAN make it feasible, you know that there are other "forces", read MONEY at work. If the democratic -and republican... - leaders had the courage to support and demand single payer, it could happen.
As far as their political future goes, I think they would be heroes for providing healthcare for all their constituents, and would be secure in their seats.

As far as alternative health care models being left out of the discussion, single pyer is of course the most blatant case. Politicans have gone to great lengths to ignore, discredit and villify this ONLY solution to the healthcare mess.
Also, what has not been debated at all is the German model, which is based on the private health insurance industry which is regulated by the government who guarantees comprehensive care and affordability. The insurance companies are left to compete on "frills", service etc.

The whole debate in the U.S is surreal. How can there even BE a debate about building health care on companies whose main mission is to make profit by NOT providing care. Unbelievable!!

Come to Washington on July 30th and rally for Medicare for ALL

This is an open letter to President Obama and Members of Congress regarding health care reform that appeared on my Blog:

I am a United States citizen currently a legal resident of Ireland. In order to achieve residency I had to live here one-year and give proof of my income (currently just under the U.S. poverty level for a single person--pension & SSI). Once residency was granted (eight-years ago), the only restriction was that I may not seek or accept employment here. However, as a resident of Ireland, I am entitled to all the benefits provided its retired citizens -- free health care, free prescriptions, free dental care, free eye exam and glasses, a travel pass that allows me to travel free all over the island by bus or rail. And, due to my low-income, I receive a rent subsidy.

Two-years ago, I needed orthopedic surgery to replace my right knee. Once diagnosed, I waited only two-months for the operation. When completed I was in hospital for ten-days then went to a resident nursing facility for one-week where I received daily physical therapy. One-year ago, I was diagnosed as having pulmonary embolisms in both lungs and was hospitalized for twelve-days. The cost to me of these hospital stays, nursing facility, therapy and administered medication, was zero.

I currently am taking several prescribed medications but have no idea what they cost as I obtain them free from my local pharmacy. Appointments at my local clinic to see the physician of my choice are also free.

Sadly, the end result of having all the benefits I receive in Ireland renders it financially impossible for me to even consider moving back to the U.S. Needless to say, I do not intend to become an economic burden on my family who, themselves, have had difficulty maintaining their own heads above the financial flood of these past few years. Therefore, unless there is resolution of the health care crisis in the U.S., including remedying the paucity of the current Medicare Program, a move back to California in 2012 when I turn eighty is near impossible.

At minimum, one would hope that the United States, which has a GNP/GDP immensely greater than that of Ireland, would at least provide its retired citizens the free medical and prescription benefits I enjoy here.

My question to you is: Why am I denied the free medical care and prescription medication in my own country that I am provided by my resident country?

Best wishes,
Margie Bernard

I wish every American could have seen this! Every American needs to see this!
It disgusts me that nothing other than pure greed on the part of medi-businesses (Insurance, The AMA, drug manufacturers, for-profit hospitals)takes a front seat to the health and well being of Americans.
47 million people in this country are uninsured.
I was so angry to hear Congressman and Senators bash the proposal for a government sponsored health care plan.
How can they even believe in their wildest imaginations, that anyone would CHOOSE to NOT have health insurance? The myth of those who want to go 'nekkid' is just absurd and proves how effective the high paid lobbyist really are.
Shame on the Washington Post for giving permission for it's publisher to host that dinner for members of congress and for the insurance executives. I have just canceled my subscription.
Good job Mr. Moyers, please keep up the good work. I especially enjoyed your closing remarks. You are right, it is all about money and all about greed!

There is no such thing as health "insurance". We all need some level of health care.
Health care has been around forever. (Even some animals tend for their kind)
We are confusing the good of health care with the "goods" that have come to be associated with it in the past 80 years.
The good Samaritan provided to another in need.
For political or economic reasons, optometric, dental, psychiatric, chiropractic, acupuncture , etc services have historically ,at times, been excluded.
Thank you for providing this information on PUBLIC
BROADCASTING SERVICE. As with NPR, and PRI, quality programming is provided thanks to their talented and dedicated staff. The supporters endure pledge, are loyal and even bestow endowments in their estates.PBS has met with opposition from the same quarters that now wish to defeat single payer.
As we use the internet for these communications, let's realize that it was begot by the Arpanet, which was established for the government.
As with any endeavor, it is how it is designed and implemented that determines
it's utility and effectiveness.
Just look to GM, to see the analogy for the private ,corporate health insurance
model.
Too big, unresponsive to it's clients, and mismanaged.
Some monumental, salient challenges require a national commitment.

I do agree that there are changes that need to be made with health care, and i don't clame to have all the answeres: just a few great points that need to be considered backed by my personal life experiences.
There needs to be rules laid down for health care so only people who deserve it are able to receive it, bare with me. I have two aunts who choose to abuse wisconsin's badger care, each with there own situation. I will start with my youngest aunt, Denise. Her husband and her use the public health care system. He smokes about 2-4 packs of marlboro reds (cowboy killers) a day. They also have a brand new $8,000 camper, $14,000 dollar harley, and a F350. Expensive "toys" for people who can not affors to pay for health care. Oh, not to mention she baby sits for cash that tye do not clame on their taxes. So on top of it all they get our hard earned cash back to abusing the system. Not to mention they were able to afford to buy a new house. There needs to be some sort of regulation in place that will take the camper, harley, new house into consideration. Some form, maybe new, branch of government that needs to regulate this knowingly abuse of the system. The branch shoud discontinue the health care of the parents until the situation is set straight, but the 3 kids, ages 6 and under are covered. Kid's can not be punished for desisions of their parents.
Other situations such as my other aunt's situation, Jody. She has 2 kids, and 2 step kids. They also have a house and a harley, but can not afford their own health care.
I know this may strike a un-American nerve with may readers, but it needs to be considered. In both situations the man and/or women should be fixed/or made to take form of agressive contraceptive. Many of the problems with America stem from people wanting everything done "now" and without any "real" work involed(No surprise obesity is on the rise. Until the ideology on the hard working american who lives within his/her means makes a return I truly worry about the progression of America. If there are any Question or requests for a more in depth explinations for policies that need to be changed: feel free to contact me at jkaph680@uwsp.edu Subject: Reply or call 920-470-2162
Just a reminder actions speak louder than words!

Hooray! I don't have to go to DC alone. On July 30 Celebrate Medicare's 44th birthday and lobby for single payer, public option, Medicare for all, universal coverage. The specifics are on Healthcare Now's website and the United Professionals website. Time to gather, demonstrate, lobby. We have a choice to make.

There is no conclusion in all the above Blogs. It goes on and on, are people only interested in showing how intelligent they are, with no results!!!.

The rest of the Government civilized world pays for the HealthCare of its people, especially the poor, and I mean the people who have to spend their hard earned money for the medical bills. What is left for their living?.

To: John Dove,

I thought I was the only one that realized this.....

This brings on the effect, that when an american was doing his duty in Russia, he met an old russian woman in the country-side, and asked her, if she thought about coming to America, she exclaimed: "Staying in America" I would not give up Russia for no place in the World.

This was an excellent piece. I only found out about it via another forum that I am on. Thank you for presenting it.
The needs of us all for proper medical care in contrast to the insurance companies to parasitically use us is phenomenal. I know I have a medical condition that needs expensive medical care and drugs, and I am thankful that I have employee paid healthcare at the moment, but if that were to be gone, I would be bankrupt. I wish Congress would listen!

To: Betsy Whitfill:

I agree with most you say, only the one liner about that patriotic statement.

Thanks.

To: Betsy Whittfield:

What kind of saying is that: It is lunacy!!.

It doesn't mean a thing.

Great piece about single-payer. However, I was a bit upset at the comment "Taiwan, of all places, said...". Was it really necessary to suggest that Taiwan is inferior to the United States?

Dear Bill,

___I have the privilege of enjoying your Journal program on Friday evenings. I often come away from your discussions with cause for thought, and sometimes angst. I found myself particularly provoked after your recent presentation on the Obama proposal for healthcare reform.
___It truly disgusts me that almost every discussion or interview about healthcare reform asserts that we have no chance for universal single-payer healthcare ... that we have no chance to escape the bloodsucking clutches of the health insurance industry ... that we must suffer and die for the sake of parasitic insurance profits. This would be grief enough for me, but I can't escape being haunted by the realization that everyone, including you, seems to ignore the underlying disease that spawns such scandal. Why is no one screaming about the elephant in the room?
___We, the citizens of the United States, live in the world's most advanced banana republic. We have the best government that money can buy. Beside the graft and bribery that far too often fills our newspapers, our present excuse for representative democracy guarantees undue influence for wealthy individuals and corporations, mainly through our ineffective regulation of lobbyists and campaign finance. This is why we have massive tax cuts for the rich at the same time that the burden on the poor grows through increased sales taxes and fees. This is why there is no political stomach to oppose the continued outsourcing of American jobs. This is why the traditional independent media has been silenced by acquisition and consolidation. This is why there is so little public mention of the progressive decrease in real American wages. This is why we have a cadre of congressional Democrats jumping on the bandwagon to repeal the inheritance (unearned wealth) tax. This is why our usury laws have been gutted for the benefit of our poor bankers. This is why a one percent of the indebted seeking bankruptcy protection was suddenly too much abuse for poor corporate America. Between our spineless indentured elected officials and the endless torrent of corporate propaganda, there is little hope for the welfare of common men. We have a government of the people, by the rich, for the rich.
___Nonetheless, I believe that we could reclaim our ideal of democracy with a few simple, but radical, new laws.
___First, we should limit by statute all political campaign SPENDING by candidates, supporters, and opponents. Past reform attempts have clearly shown that any limits on contributions are futile. The terms "hard" and "soft" money are evidence of the hairsplitting and gaming that exists in the present system. Also, limits on contributions do nothing to stem the deluge of special interest propaganda that often lies and distorts. Hitler and Mussolini proved seventy years ago that repetition and saturation can bring success to the most outrageous propaganda. If wealth is allowed to saturate people with its message, it can drown out any opposing view. I realize that this idea falls afoul of ridiculous Supreme Court decisions that equate spending with the freedom of speech. Of course, I find no such implication in the Bill of Rights or the Articles of the Constitution; and letting these precedents stand would forever condemn Americans to suffer the whims of the affluent. I realize that the justices have a natural affinity with those they consider of their own class, so an amendment may be necessary. Obviously, the forces of wealth have made reform as difficult as possible.
___Second, we should criminalize as felony any exchange of value between government officials and constituents. Since U.S. citizens and government officials don't seem able to interact in a sensible and aboveboard manner, we should end all the gifts, the junkets, the meals, the tickets, the jets, the limos, the vacations, the favors, etc. All government employees and elected officials should be required to subsist strictly on the amount of government compensation provided. Any extra revenue streams for officials should be outlawed.
___Third, we should revise, reinstate, and extend the equal time provisions for politics over broadcast medium. This move might have two main benefits. Foremost, it would possibly mute the onslaught of big money. In addition, limits on exposure might encourage a return to discussion of the issues instead of buzz slogans and smear campaigns.
___In the same vein, it might be worthwhile to consider careful reinforcement of the libel and slander laws. I realize that smear campaigns have been part of American politics since the eighteenth century, but isn't it time that we matured a little? Isn't it reprehensible that we have elections decided by the best lies? (Please forgive my naivete.)
___Finally, I apologize for stealing your valuable time with my simplicity, but I tire of the endless attention paid to the results of our failings while the causes are ignored. Someone has to start talking about impossible changes in order for them to become possible.

To Tim: You talk about "Rights" and the "Constitution" like they belonged to God the Father who came down and gave the people instructions on how to live. Your "Constitution" is something that was written by people who had slaves working for them, and your "Rights" does'nt mean that it should have been implemented by God.

these so-called inferences can be amended, when the need arises, Don't you forget it.

If the government run health plan is so great then why has the president and members of congress exempted themselves and their families from the plan that they are writing, the fact is they know their plan will give every american sub standard care and they want no part of it.

Republicans are saying we shouldn't have a washington bureaucrat between ourselves and our doctors. As opposed to what we have now? Yeah, greedy wall street investors between us and the hospitals are a sure-fire way to make sure our health and well-being needs are put before profits...

Instead of thinking about the payers, we need to think about the care and the people as resources to be cared for.
If socialized medicine is good enough for the troops, it's good enough for me.
Draft the medical people into the military and be done with the debate.

Mike: Because we are anxious panicked hostages to familiar circumstances temporarily agitated persons like yourself can't expect a reaction when they exhort us to rebel and resist. It is not only that the medical system is more extractive than palliative, but also that it is poisoned by hyper-capitalism in its very conception. Young doctors now spend about as much educational effort on a business model as learning diagnosis and treatment. After all, they will be pharmaceutical salespersons and purveyors of questionable treatments when they graduate. I estimate only 10 % have a primary motivation of relieving pain and preventing disease. 90% think mostly of the potential income.

And its no different with teachers or social workers or anything else, because we lie to ourselves and expect to be an exceptional wealthy star of any career. How else could one sign the loan papers? There's no shortage of nurses, just a shortage of people with nursing degrees willing to endure the sick medical system at the going wage rates.

Why do I get on the train to Manhattan each morning? And why do I research, test and write the crap MS needs me to write (that I know is half-truths and lies) just to be part of something and get a check deposited bi-weekly? I do it partially because I was an unemployed actor most of my life and I know how it feels to be poor, and to let down your loved ones.

If I had a couple children there would be a choice between fatherly duties and serving generalized human needs, but I even lack that excuse. I keep setting a quit date but it comes and passes. I'm ahead 45K on my petroleum futures right now and I can't stop. Oh, I give most of it to filmmakers and good causes, but I do more damage than it is worth. It just makes me feel competent and respectable, seeing that money moving through my hands.

But is it healthy? Hell no! Our society and culture are sick and unsustainable, especially the medical system. We are nearing a point where all culture will be manipulated and synthetic, and where our planet will die. Neither aspect of life support is duplicable by scientific means. So you see all our business activities including what we call medicine are banal evil in practice and futile in outcome.

We go on because we allow ourselves to be terrorized and deceived. We can blame media, induced fear, miseducation, backward religion, conformism, the need to be liked.... Most of us live in a shallow, dictated awareness and don't question authority, the given and familiar. We have become as used to our meaningless and cruel existence as generations of caged-raised chickens. Even our masters are little more than "capos" (visit a holocaust museum if you don't know).

Imagine the medicine of egg and broiler production: the growth hormones, the antibiotics, the disinfectant sprays, the pruned beaks and claws, and the final solution. It's not that different from our psychotrophic drug regimens and mass medications and mutilations. That's why I can't work in a cubicle (have to have a window with a view); too damn much like a cage, and I might wake up and quit. Then where would we be?

If American politics and corporations are joining each other to continually control and over-ride the American public's welfare. Why do we continue to except this disfunction in goverment? Are we a third world country yet? Does any one care? Where are our storming masses of people who demand positive change to take place? are they too busy keeping food on the table?

I watched this episode when it first came out, and several times since - there is SO MUCH great info in it.

I think of this as the most vital tool for proponents of Single Payer - and I regularly ask people that have questions about health reform to watch this! you really didn't miss a single thing, just brilliant.

I really wanted to thank you, Bill Moyers, for covering this so incredibly well - it very well may be your finest work EVER.

Much Respect,
Heather

The single payer tsunami is stirring. Congress is starting to feel that slight puff of breeze in between their endless bickering over the most arcane and irrelevant aspects of their going nowhere healthcare reform legislation. You can see it in their faces!

The breeze picks up June 25th in DC.

Mainstream media, be there. Show the world how America does it!

Its been on the news today, the health care reform is going to fail. Imagine the naysayers delight!!. The Rich are going to have their way because of LOBBYISTS. Is this a Democratic nation?. They conquered the Indians and stole their land. Now, they are murdering the poor people and there is nobody to stop them. They should follow the system of the European countries,That is my last stand.

Single payer health care and Why are the rich getting richer in the American Dream.
I am concerned that single payer is at the top of the list to be ignored in order for the rich to get richer. I just received email contradicting most of your program on single payer health care. It is from a person that is well thought of in Oklahoma. I have always thought of her in a good light and I had to look up on the web exactly why this was so. Below is a short text I found of her on the web:
"Neese made history in 1990 as the first woman nominated by a major political party for Lt. Governor of Oklahoma. Prior to that historic campaign, she founded Terry Neese Personnel Services along with five other companies in the personnel, farming, ranching, and real estate industries.
Terry Neese is a motivator for women's issues and entrepreneurs. One of her companies, GrassRoots Impact, is a corporate and government public policy strategies firm with rapid response surveying capabilities. GrassRoots Impact's clients include American Express, Intuit, IBM, Verizon and many other top global corporations. GrassRoots Impact excels in crafting a communications strategy and fine tuning "the message" that corporations and government agencies need in order to reach out effectively to women and minorities in business."
The below email sounds like what the insurance companies would create. If we have trusted people sending out misinformation on behalf of insurance companies, whether it is directly for them or indirectly, then money is the American reality no matter what the American Dream is. If we cannot hold such bulk emailing of influence accountable to the correctness or misinformation they promote, then the loyal followers will swallow it and we shall stay here in Wonderland.
START OF EMAIL (pictures not included)
"Free Our Health Care Now. Action steps below ...Everywhere I go, small business owners tell me something needs to be done to make health care more affordable and available to small business employers. According to a survey by Towers Perrin, businesses will spend $9,552 per employee this year. As costs go up it makes it very difficult to continue to provide coverage.
Unfortunately, too much of the debate in Washington is focused on either/or - either we have a government run system or we don't. We only have to look as far as Canada to realize that nationalizing health care does not work.
Some in Washington are pushing for reforms that will move the US health care system closer to that of Canada's or Great Britain. If this is successful, you will have fewer health care choices and your access to care will be more limited. The government, not you and your doctor, will be responsible for determining whether you receive care. You will be "wait listed" for critical diagnostic tests. You may wait two or three years for surgery. You may not have access to life-saving cancer and other drugs. You will pay higher taxes. These are not fear mongering statements--they are facts proven in countries where their government runs health care. Can you tell me one thing that government has run that is successful? We can reform health care without the government taking it over!
It's not often that I reach out to you on something like this. When I do, you can rest assured that I am VERY concerned about this for myself, my family and my friends.
You can help stop this government takeover of health care. Send a message to the White House and every member of Congress by signing the petition at www.freeourhealthcarenow.com. If you agree with this petition, please forward this to your family and friends and associates. "
END OF EMAIL
I summarize my concern with my belief that as long as misinformation is simply a tool and there is no consequence for using such a tool, in fact there is reward for using it; our American Dream will stay polarized with no single payer health system to the benefit of the rich getting richer. Is there anything to be done or are we just stuck in Wonderland?
Concerned, Mark Bartusch

To: Bill Moyers

Can you approach congress and question them, if Europe and other first-world and some third-world countries have health care for their people, why is America calling their patients, "CUSTOMERS". iF YOU DON'T BELIEVE THIS, COME TO ARIZONA AND FIND OUT.

I would like someone to give the arguments against those made in this document:
Twenty Myths about Single-Payer Health Insurance
International Evidence on the Effects of
National Health Insurance in Countries Around the World

http://debate-central.ncpa.org/topics/2002/book2.pdf

The rest of the world, and I mean the civilized world has health care for its people, only AMERICA, THINK ABOUT THAT. Why is America called a Capitalist country and nobody is making a Fuss about it. I thought it was a DEMOCRACY!!!.

Some say health system would be too expensive America pays most in world for health care but is last in the world in total care. Savings in the system would pay for it all

With the exception of Bill Moyers, all the media has been publishing biased reporting against health care reform. They are ALL against any sort of reform. Why? It's obvious. All the media is employed at big companies and have good private health care coverage at work. The very last thing they want to do is upset the gravy train. NO ONE is reporting on the hardships of the uninsured. NO ONE! It's sickening and is going to be the undoing of any progress on health care for the uninsured.

Why is it that Health Care reform is only needed for the Underclass and nobody else seems to comprehend it. The Rich,are not involvedd, they smile on the TV, giving their views from Food to Entertainment and America sits idely by without saying anything. Why?.

To Maylli:

America doesn't care obout its people, Don't people realize this?

To Betsy Whitfill:

Thank you for explaining what you did, at least somebody can explain this kind of Empathy to the American People. Fact is they don't know better, all they can do is "Let it ride".

“Momentum for a health care overhaul built this week after Obama obtained a pledge from medical providers to find $2 trillion in savings over 10 years to help pay for his plan.”

What is with all this national health care funding smoke & mirror noise? The money would come from “those that pay” the heath care bills now.

The existing United States health care system is funded in two ways, government (from taxes) and the individual. Those are the only two customers of our health care system that pay.

The health care system break-even costs must be met or it goes out of business.

The costs for those who cannot pay are passed on to “those that pay”.

The budget for a United States national health care system is the annual amount spent by “those that pay”.

The French “national health care system” is the 2nd most expensive in the world. For all its warts, the health of the French people reflects well on that system.

If we cloned the French system (with its warts) in the United States our cost of health care per individual (“those that pay”) would be reduced 50% and the health of “all” the American people would dramatically improve.

The business community (excluding – you know) must be drooling over the opportunity for dramatic reduction in the cost of labor (medical premiums) with improved employee health (increased productivity).

It is my intent to point out that the cost (budget) for Universal Health Care in the United States is already funded. Any politician that questions, “how we are going to pay for Universal Health Care” should be identified in the media as a stooge for special interests.

As funding is not a problem, then the focus should be on taking the best from the Universal Health Care programs other nations have (leave the warts – we will create our own) and get on with implementing Universal Health Care in the United States.

When Robert Reich spoke of single-payer not being "politically feasible" he neglected to mention the primary reason for this. It's not so much that the voice of the people is being drowned out by the voice of the lobbyists, as it is the amount of corporate cash going into the pockets of "our" representatives.
Unless the people can outbid the corporate interests, it does little good to outvote them.

The real legacy of Ronald Reagan's generation of free market conservatism may be that, even when liberals describe and try to sell government-run health care plans, they describe an alternative "public option" as one that will provide the public more CHOICES and COMPETITION and ability to NEGOTIATE FOR LOWER PRICES. These are Republican principles, flat out. Other than abortion, its never been a Democrat idea to give anyone more "choices." But a government-run health care plan will certainly not be negotiating lower prices - it will be dictating lower prices. Each of us will be making up the difference through higher income and other federal taxes, and suddenly our doctors won't be returning our calls for the 90 percent of us who do have health coverage.

The real legacy of Ronald Reagan's generation of free market conservatism may be that, even when liberals describe and try to sell government-run health care plans, they describe an alternative "public option" as one that will provide the public more CHOICES and COMPETITION and ability to NEGOTIATE FOR LOWER PRICES. These are Republican principles, flat out. Other than abortion, its never been a Democrat idea to give anyone more "choices." But a government-run health care plan will certainly not be negotiating lower prices - it will be dictating lower prices. Each of us will be making up the difference through higher income and other federal taxes, and suddenly our doctors won't be returning our calls for the 90 percent of us who do have health coverage.

Calling Health Care a individual's Human Right might not be the best way to describe it. It might be better understood as a social responsibility. There is a difference.
If, for example, you fall off a boat, you do not have a "right" to not drown. If you die, your rights have not been abused. Likewise, I have no obligation to risk my own life to save you.
If, however, I am holding a life preserver in my hand and I refuse to throw it to you, then I have failed in my responsiblity as a human being, and might even be charged with a crime.
No one is asking anyone to sacrifice their lives to save the uninsured. But collectively, a very small exertion on our part could save thousands of valuable lives.
Single Payer health insurance is a life preserver that will cost us very little and might save us a great deal. The uninsured might not have a "right" to that life preserver, but we do have an obligation to throw it as accurately as we possibly can.
In other words, an individual might not have a "right" to health care, but that doesn't relive us of the responsibility to provide it. Their clear need trumps our "right" to sit back and do nothing.

After we get single payer health care, lets go after the AMA and ADA and drug companies so we can bring the cost of care down even further. The AMA understands the law of supply and demand, which is why they keep the number of doctors low, and the cost of education high. If the President told the AMA to increase the number of medical students by 10% a year or lose its monopoly on practicing medicine, we would have more doctors. If we required them to work for two years in a family practice before taking on a speciality, we would have more family doctors. If we allowed nurses to do the things they know how to do, but that currently require a doctors signature, it would drop the cost of getting basic care dramatically. If the government funded research into promising home remedies that were low-cost or free (the drug companies won't) then we could take better care of ourselves.
Insurance companies are robbing us blind - but they aren't the only ones. From top to bottom the sickness management system is completely dysfunctional.

Today the US stopped broadcasting TV signals in analog and converted to digital TV signals. Millions of dollars (at least) and untold hours of publicity went into this conversion. Yet while we were able to effect such a technological change, somehow, our nation is unable to change our health care system, because it would be too hard to change. Food for thought.

It's June 12 and we are still at it....

David Swanson | The Rise of Single-Payer Health Care
http://www.truthout.org/061209R
David Swanson, Truthout: "Health care reform plans are being drafted and passed around on both sides of Capitol Hill, but the plan with the greatest number of Congressional members behind it was first introduced as a bill six years ago. With two new co-sponsors having just signed on, Congressman John Conyers's single-payer health care plan, HR 676, now has 80 Congress members supporting it."

Kucinich explains HR 676, Aug. 2006
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZbAwrycIc0

All those in favour of not supporting the HealthCare for the Poor. What GOD or Religion are they Following?

Single Payer is the best plan but the name causes image confusion so I was inspired to think of a new approach when I heard that in spite of growing public interest going over 50% approval, it was only mentioned 5 times in the New York Times last year ~

~ Care Assurance Network ~
Creative credit for self-sustaining participation;
* Relative regularity ~ habit training as primary care value growing
* Response ability ~ exceptional development case work networking
* Respect paid as C.A.N. dues ~ redistribution of supportive resources

...as a branch of economic value stimulation, health services are representative points of sharing mutual support.
...the informational process recognizes contributors with merits for participation.
...the acceptance of even uncommon truth is the social fabric that weaves the best integrity for investment in innovation.

I am responding to the Robert Reich quote just posted:

I have no idea why President Obama has not yet made an appeal to the American people, supported their involvement in public education and discussion on issues which effect local politics for all of us (?), and challenged us to insist upon local changes, which support what he knows to be the "change" necessary at the federal level for "real recovery". Roosevelt (in the Great Depression) supported work and workers from the "bottom-up", and so far we have only "bailed out" those who created the problem at the "top"... Maybe it will come, but "real recovery" (?), probably not, until it does.

Farley Andrews

We can all talk, but can we all act. Any Suggestions!!!?.

I support a single payer system because I think our current system have become too complex, too bureaucratic and too expensive for individuals and companies.

But I think it’s laughable that people think our federal government taking over the payments will increase efficiency. Care will become politicized, corrupted and managed by a massive bureaucracy that has little reason to streamline. Think of California, Massachusetts, NASA, the DoD or the post office. I remember the post office wanted to close a redundant computer center and save $30M per year. It was shot down by the local congressman because of the loss of jobs. Imagine shutting down a poorly run hospital.

So, Bill and Dr’s Himmelstein and Wolfe, you can save the infomercial (you guys could have been selling the Bassomatic the way you piled it on). You had me at the current system needs to change. But stop accusing people who have doubts about the rosy world you describe as right wingers who are in the pockets of the insurance companies. I’m for a single payer system because it’s the significant lesser of two evils. But I’m not naïve.

I come from a "Third World Country" and Healthcare was free. Imagine Free!!!.
Here in America the so-called "Land of the Free" you have nothing that is Free. Who is to blame, but the Government that is not interested in the Welfare of its people. Why?. Because this is what Capitalism is all about.

Single Payer is the best plan but the name causes image confusion so I was inspired to think of a new approach when I heard that in spite of growing public interest going over 50% approval, it was only mentioned 5 times in the New York Times last year ~

~ Care Assurance Network ~
Creative credit for self-sustaining participation;
* Relative regularity ~ habit training as primary care value growing
* Response ability ~ exceptional development case work networking
* Respect paid as C.A.N. dues ~ redistribution of supportive resources

...as a branch of economic value stimulation, health services are representative points of sharing mutual support.
...the informational process recognizes contributors with merits for participation.
...the acceptance of even uncommon truth is the social fabric that weaves the best integrity for investment in innovation.

In your article you referenced a number of people in support of the single-payer healthcare system. Yet you never showcased the opposing views. Why is this?

Don't worry, I am not looking for a response, I already know what it is...

To go straight to single payer, we need to buy out the contracts held by private basic health insurers we don't already own through AIG. This is your basic hostile takeover, and Paul Krugman’s warning to distrust the private insurers reinforces the reality that we have no more time to waste in the pretense of nicey-nicey. The federal government should offer them the prorated amount of the premiums on contracts with time remaining after the start of the single-payer program. This is generous, since they'd keep this is almost pure profit. If health contracts are generally one calendar year (unlike cell phones) and the feds have an Oct. 1 fiscal year, let's pay out $1,000 X 3 calendar year months remaining for 119 million people. That's less than $360 billion--chump change by Wall Street bailout standards. Any companies that refuse the deal will have to explain to their stockholders why they are rejecting such largesse and/or preferring to go straight to bankruptcy. The US taxpayer will recoup this buyout investment in one year, based on widely shared estimates of savings, and after that, we are ahead by trillions.

The voices of people everywhere are being heard. We the people speak:

http://www.truthout.org/060709Y

First of all such programs about single payer system should be shown on regular network channels like cbs,nbc,fox so that millions of Americans can see the truth about how insurance companies are robbing people and make them bankrupt.

Of course not, because these networks and congressmen are paid by the insurance companies not to air such programs.
I do not understand the fact that if you lose your job you lose your health benefits.
That’s absurd. How can health benefits and employment be linked together. And then you start looking for private insurances, and they reject you because of your pre-existing condition, or your premiums and deductibles are sky rocketing.

Even if the Obama plan says the insurance companies cannot reject people based on pre-existing conditions, the insurance companies have lot of other ways to make money by denying more claims and making the process more difficult for patients and doctors.
There is no set standard and there is nobody to oversee these companies.

I am a pharmacist so I know how people are frustrated everyday with their health plans. Most of the time they do not cover the medications that they need, and higher copay for brand medications. In this country, with these private insurance companies running the lives of people, as long as you are healthy no problem. But for average middle class Americans, if you fall sick, you are buried with huge medical bills, leaving you stressed, anxious, more sick and bankrupt. You think that you will be covered for the most part if you have a serious illness because you paid your premiums regularly every month. But when the time comes, I don’t know what happens to all the money that you paid all the years where did it go? You are slapped with thousands of dollars in medical and insurance bills.

Washington has used tax payer money to bail out wall street companies, but they do not feel the health of American people is important, they don’t care. Shame on the congress that they are getting paid by the insurance companies to keep their mouth shut. There has been so much discussion and analysis about wall street, bail outs, car companies etc on prime time television But why not about universal and single payer health care system and its benefits. The government is bailing out wall street companies with tax payer money despite of their foolishness but who is going to bail out people who are bankrupt because of the insurance companies. The media is also to blame because they get money from drug companies and insurance companies.

I did believe in Obama when he said universal healthcare, but he is not keeping his promises by suggesting public/private plan which is not going to work. Why is Washington making it complicated. This is the 21st century, U.S is the wealthiest and industrialized nation in the world with a broken health care system and no president is doing anything about it. Are other countries in the world stupid or fools to have single payer system? Isn’t it odd that only U.S in the entire world has private insurance system despite of the fact it doesn’t work. Single payer system is not perfect but it works.

I am amazed at the growing responses from doctors and nurses who can see clearly that the current health care system does not work and growing number of people dying because of it. It is the responsibility of the American people to speak up because the congress does not care ( they are taken care of by the private insurance company ).

I am overwhelmed by the support of the people for single payer, and yet the congress does not see it. How can that happen? Let us join hands and make this happen. This is the year of change.

Those still checking into this blog may be interested in the President's letter to Senators Kennedy and Baucus regarding Health Reform Legislation:

June 2, 2009
The Honorable Edward M. Kennedy
The Honorable Max Baucus
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
Dear Senator Kennedy and Senator Baucus:

The meeting that we held today was very productive and I want to commend you for your leadership -- and the hard work your Committees are doing on health care reform, one of the most urgent and important challenges confronting us as a Nation.

In 2009, health care reform is not a luxury. It's a necessity we cannot defer. Soaring health care costs make our current course unsustainable. It is unsustainable for our families, whose spiraling premiums and out-of-pocket expenses are pushing them into bankruptcy and forcing them to go without the checkups and prescriptions they need. It is unsustainable for businesses, forcing more and more of them to choose between keeping their doors open or covering their workers. And the ever-increasing cost of Medicare and Medicaid are among the main drivers of enormous budget deficits that are threatening our economic future.

In short, the status quo is broken, and pouring money into a broken system only perpetuates its inefficiencies. Doing nothing would only put our entire health care system at risk. Without meaningful reform, one fifth of our economy is projected to be tied up in our health care system in 10 years; millions more Americans are expected to go without insurance; and outside of what they are receiving for health care, workers are projected to see their take-home pay actually fall over time.

We simply cannot afford to postpone health care reform any longer. This recognition has led an unprecedented coalition to emerge on behalf of reform -- hospitals, physicians, and health insurers, labor and business, Democrats and Republicans. These groups, adversaries in past efforts, are now standing as partners on the same side of this debate.

At this historic juncture, we share the goal of quality, affordable health care for all Americans. But I want to stress that reform cannot mean focusing on expanded coverage alone. Indeed, without a serious, sustained effort to reduce the growth rate of health care costs, affordable health care coverage will remain out of reach. So we must attack the root causes of the inflation in health care. That means promoting the best practices, not simply the most expensive. We should ask why places like the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota, the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, and other institutions can offer the highest quality care at costs well below the national norm. We need to learn from their successes and replicate those best practices across our country. That's how we can achieve reform that preserves and strengthens what's best about our health care system, while fixing what is broken.

The plans you are discussing embody my core belief that Americans should have better choices for health insurance, building on the principle that if they like the coverage they have now, they can keep it, while seeing their costs lowered as our reforms take hold. But for those who don't have such options, I agree that we should create a health insurance exchange -- a market where Americans can one-stop shop for a health care plan, compare benefits and prices, and choose the plan that's best for them, in the same way that Members of Congress and their families can. None of these plans should deny coverage on the basis of a preexisting condition, and all of these plans should include an affordable basic benefit package that includes prevention, and protection against catastrophic costs. I strongly believe that Americans should have the choice of a public health insurance option operating alongside private plans. This will give them a better range of choices, make the health care market more competitive, and keep insurance companies honest.

I understand the Committees are moving towards a principle of shared responsibility -- making every American responsible for having health insurance coverage, and asking that employers share in the cost. I share the goal of ending lapses and gaps in coverage that make us less healthy and drive up everyone's costs, and I am open to your ideas on shared responsibility. But I believe if we are going to make people responsible for owning health insurance, we must make health care affordable. If we do end up with a system where people are responsible for their own insurance, we need to provide a hardship waiver to exempt Americans who cannot afford it. In addition, while I believe that employers have a responsibility to support health insurance for their employees, small businesses face a number of special challenges in affording health benefits and should be exempted.

Health care reform must not add to our deficits over the next 10 years -- it must be at least deficit neutral and put America on a path to reducing its deficit over time. To fulfill this promise, I have set aside $635 billion in a health reserve fund as a down payment on reform. This reserve fund includes a number of proposals to cut spending by $309 billion over 10 years --reducing overpayments to Medicare Advantage private insurers; strengthening Medicare and Medicaid payment accuracy by cutting waste, fraud and abuse; improving care for Medicare patients after hospitalizations; and encouraging physicians to form "accountable care organizations" to improve the quality of care for Medicare patients. The reserve fund also includes a proposal to limit the tax rate at which high-income taxpayers can take itemized deductions to 28 percent, which, together with other steps to close loopholes, would raise $326 billion over 10 years.

I am committed to working with the Congress to fully offset the cost of health care reform by reducing Medicare and Medicaid spending by another $200 to $300 billion over the next 10 years, and by enacting appropriate proposals to generate additional revenues. These savings will come not only by adopting new technologies and addressing the vastly different costs of care, but from going after the key drivers of skyrocketing health care costs, including unmanaged chronic diseases, duplicated tests, and unnecessary hospital readmissions.

To identify and achieve additional savings, I am also open to your ideas about giving special consideration to the recommendations of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), a commission created by a Republican Congress. Under this approach, MedPAC's recommendations on cost reductions would be adopted unless opposed by a joint resolution of the Congress. This is similar to a process that has been used effectively by a commission charged with closing military bases, and could be a valuable tool to help achieve health care reform in a fiscally responsible way.
These are some of the issues I look forward to discussing with you in greater detail in the weeks and months ahead. But this year, we must do more than discuss. We must act. The American people and America's future demand it.

I know that you have reached out to Republican colleagues, as I have, and that you have worked hard to reach a bipartisan consensus about many of these issues. I remain hopeful that many Republicans will join us in enacting this historic legislation that will lower health care costs for families, businesses, and governments, and improve the lives of millions of Americans. So, I appreciate your efforts, and look forward to working with you so that the Congress can complete health care reform by October.
Sincerely,
BARACK OBAMA

Today, regardless of how you run the numbers, the average U.S. citizen is paying hefty sums for healthcare either directly or indirectly through taxes, expensive services, pricey pharmaceuticals, and subsidies to the private health care industry.

While policy makers should consider the 'lowest cost' options (which is why a single payer plan should be looked at seriosuly), the most important outcome of any policy would be to provide universal access to health care to all our citizens.

The fundamental question at stake is whether or not we, as individuals and as a society, have a moral obligation to our fellow citizens to subsidy their healthcare when they are, themselves, unable to pay. Or, do we instead continue to support a system that provides incentives for businesses to make a profit from the suffering of people?

By some accounts, the United States is one of the wealthiest nations in the world, yet, we have people in this country dying from treatable health issues simply because they do not have access to health care.

This reality goes against every humanitarian fiber in my body and every time I think about it I agonize over being part of a system that causes people like my neighbour, my co-worker, or members of my family to suffer.

We have a moral obligation to do the right thing and make sure that every person in this country has access to health care.

Note: I had to leave the http links out of most of the web sites because my blog was probably being mistaken for spam and filtered out. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Hi Linda Mae,
I think you have such a frightened world view and low expectations for our country.
The America you envision is not the America that most of Americans envision.
Or are you so badly mis/uninformed?
Single-payer (improved and enhanced Medicare for All) is and has been almost completely censored by the corporate broadcast media (except for Ed Schultz of MSNBC and a few more I'm sure) and corporate print media.
So the tiny bit of room single-payer gets on Bill Moyer's Journal is only fair.
You said, Linda, there was no sense of debate.
Well, the single-payer solution has been completely left out of the debate for years by the corporate media to begin with.
There was no debate at the recent Senate Finance Committee roundtable discussions on health care reform because the physicians and advocates were not allowed a seat at the table. Eight of them were arrested for trying to get a word in edge-wise.
Senator Baucus (D)-MT who led the discussions has received over a million dollars from the health insurance industry and big pharma since 2004.
Yeah, there is no debate all right, you've got that part right.

It should be asked: Why is single-payer being so heavily censored?
If it was such a horrible idea and system, the corporate media (and health insurance industry and big pharma) would welcome this info to be revealed.
It's only been mentioned with the fear and smear tactics by the corporate media.

An important question has to be asked: How come in nearly every field of human endeavor America is able to do things as well or better than the rest of the industrialized world (with health care for all) except provide an efficient cost effective health care system for its own people?
I liken single-payer to that of a wheel. By its very construction it rolls smoothly on a continuous smooth edge. What if a bicycle or car wheel had fifty edges?
That would be a very bumpy and unpleasant ride but this is the state of our horribly expensive, wasteful, fragmented, employment linked, dangerous, deadly non-system of health care that America has, which you think is just fine.
As the early wheel improved, becoming lighter using spokes and lighter and stronger materials, bearings... so too can America fine tune single-payer.
We're America. We can reach for the stars! United We Stand! Right??? Isn't this right???

Leaving this aside, just by facts alone, the Congressional Budget Office and General Accountability office crunched the numbers back in the early nineties to conclude if we phased in single payer we would save enough money to adequately cover everyone's health care in America. There are so many other studies that verify this too.
It's just a matter of phasing out the wicked health insurance industry (middleman) which is sucking away our health care dollars towards CEO salaries and bonuses, golden parachutes, etc.
Health care is not a commodity, period.

The present health care reforms are just a ruse to leave the health insurance industry in the mix, continuing putting billions of dollars into the health insurance industry pockets instead of directly into health care to cover the uninsured and under insured. This whole health care reform going on in D.C. is just a farce. Billions of dollars annually will continue to pay for the CEO's and executive's toys and lavish life style while millions of Americans are left to be health care beggars with stripped down bare-bones health insurance, co-pays and deductibles; Also, the health insurance industry kept in the loop will continue to be a drag on business and our economy. The politicians not behind The U.S. National Health Insurance Act, HR 676 (or state versions of this Bill), are sell-outs; it's that simple, folks.

Progressives are socialist, communists, or fascists? Leaving aside how ridiculous a statement that is, if you're implying only progressives endorse single-payer then check out:
www.republicansforsinglepayer.com.

Also, Dr. Paul DeMarco recently wrote an op-ed for the Spartanburg (S.C.) Herald Journal explaining why as a conservative he supports single-payer and the principle of mutual aid:
www.pnhp.org/news/2009/may/universal_health_car.php

Also, the conservative editorial board of Times Union (Albany, NY) ran an editorial May 19, take a look:
www.pnhp.org/news/2009/may/put_singlepayer_on_.php

Also, the conservative businessman Jack Lohman a strong single-payer advocate has a web site:
www.throwtherascalsout.org/eNewsletter94.htm

I have a question: Is Japan a socialist or communist country? Or Germany or Taiwan? They all have a true non-profit health care system with Taiwan having a purely single-payer system. Do they have their share of problems with it? Yes, but they are exaggerated and taken out of context by special interests. The fact is that life threatening illnesses are taken care of immediately and other industrialized countries do a lot more with about 1/2 to 3/4 of what we spend; none of these countries or any other industrialized country has anywhere near the health care woes of our country.

Besides, when in the public sector, the people can influence change much easier. The Canadian Health Coalition is an example.
The overwhelming majority of Canadians support their Medicare system and would never exchange it for ours. The same goes for the other industrialized countries.
There would be a mass riot if it was tried.

America's wild west mentality health care non-system causes about 18,000 deaths annually, untold mental and physical pain and suffering, about 50% bankruptcies (yes 50%) due in part or fully to medical related bills (of which about 75% had health insurance, but the deductibles and co-pays sunk them), people stuck in jobs they don't like to keep their health insurance, loose their insurance when they loose their jobs, a drag on small businesses and the economy. The corporate media does not cover this on a regular basis.
Meanwhile, health insurance CEOs and executives are enjoying their mansions and yachts.
This might be the highest expectations that some people have for our country but I think most Americans think we can do a lot better.
As long our corrupt politicians continue looking out for their wallet (not giving a damn) or political life, instead of the good of the people and country this will continue.

For those of you who want to hold on to your HMO, POS, etc., if you get really sick or injured you'll see how fast your bills will start to mount from the co-pays and deductibles which might very well bankrupt you. This would be an additional stress while you're trying to heal, and stress is not good at all for healing.
Also, why would you want to have your health care linked to your employment?

The Canadian Health Coalition in a letter to President Obama has exposed the smear tactics of the Conservatives for Patients' Rights which recent TV ads here in America
has been smearing the Canadian Medicare system. Rick Scott, the sponsor of the ads was removed from office in 1997 by the board of directors during the largest health care scandal in the United States. His company Columbia/HCA was forced to pay $1.7 billion in fines for overbilling state and federal government health plans.
Go to:
www.pnhp.org/news/2009/may/health_coalition_att.php
and click on: tough open letter to President Barack Obama

Also check out a very good article at:
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/francis/archive/2009/05/12/health-care-lies-about-canda.aspx

We single-payer advocates work hard and were raised with good work ethics. I and my brother-in-laws are from working class roots too. They all worked hard and are in the middle class bracket, however, single-payer isn't even a second thought for them and my sisters..."Of course we need it." So, I don't get your point about hard work.
Besides, single-payer would allow us to enjoy our lives better...a lot better. This is just the point.
It would be good for small business owners and the economy too.

Single-payer is the most fiscally conservative plan. This isn't an issue of conservative, liberal, socialist, fascist, but simply expanding and improving Medicare to everyone for a happier, more humane, less stressed out, and more productive country.
With that said, in some ways my family might have somewhat conservative views.
There's give and take and I think the hardcore single-payer critics are way too caught up in the dogma of their beliefs to put everything into perspective and realize single-payer is the best choice for America.

Please go to www.healthcare-now.org and sign the petition to congress for The United States National Health Insurance Act, HR 676, and see how you can get involved.
It (HR 676) has tremendous national support.

Let's attain a government of, by, and for the people instead of a government of, by, and for the health insurance industry and big pharma.

Republicans don't want to support the Single-Payer system but they like the idea for donations to Welfare systems because not only do they claim Tax credits but they like the Idea of "Handouts".

I am a supporter of Single Payer but more than that I am a supporter of the average person educating themselves about the issues that will affect them and their families.

I and another like minded co-worker tried to organize a Pizza/Movie night with our female co-workers (off site) to show Michael Moore's film Sicko. I told them that I would provide the food and drink and I just wanted to show them the film and talk about it. I made it VERY clear that I was not trying to convert anyone I just wanted to show them this issue and get their take on it.

Well no one was interested. The reasons basically came down to - 'Well, I've got mine so why do I have to worry about anyone else?' and the film is "too heavy" and that is not how they want to spend an evening. One woman is from Texas and has an almost pathological aversion to any federal government involvement Many said "Why should I have to pay for someone else to have health care? Obviously not knowing that we ALL pay for the uninsured, but HOW we pay for them is hidden in higher premiums and higher prices, not just for health care but throughout our economy. My friend and I were disappointed to say the least.

Maybe it is human nature that until something affects you personally you cannot bother to put yourself out there, maybe it is our American culture of individualism and anti-government that prevents us from feeling empathy and anger about this issue. Perhaps people sense that this is a bigger issue than health care and really involves our entire political system and culture and so it overwhelms them.

I think this may be some of the reasons you don't see big rallies or protesting in front of Health Insurance companies, like Aetna and Wellpoint. The majority of people are covered by health insurance, they think they have nothing to worry about and so are too complacent. Again, ignorance is bliss as most do not know that even with health insurance there is no guarantee that you will receive the care you need or that it will be paid for.

While I groan inwardly over my co-workers misconceptions and their apparent belief the outright lies , like America has the best health care in the world, I don't fault them as much as I do the press which refuses to cover this issue honestly and continues a virtual black out of the single payer option. Most of what I have learned about this issue I had to ferret out from the sites on the internet, read books at the library and investigate government sites such as the DOJ (Fraud) or the Office of Budget and Management (statistical studies of health care costs).

So I guess we have free speech but not a free press. One can FIND information if one digs but do not depend upon the press for information in this day of corporate owned newspapers and news rooms.

I truly believe that if Watergate happened today NO ONE would know about it!

My friend and I are trying to come up with other ways to educate our co-workers on this issue without offending anyone. I was looking forward to having a discussion with them on this issue - oh well.

Maybe if I offer a door prize.......?

I strongly support single payer insurance. The scare tactics are just that, scare tactics. With what is being talked about now (a "public option") it is fair to say it will fail. The healthy people will end up with private insurance, and the sick people will end up on the public insurance. This unbalanced system is doomed to fail.

Private health insurance needs to be a thing of the past...

All this talk and no action. Why are we just talking and all these intelligent people have no definite action. I can't understand it. Is this what was protrayed in "A Civil Action"

John Steel is just one of the many Republicans that want to keep the masses under their control.

.

Hello...

I had posted earlier in this thread and returned to see what has transpired since.

Many fine points have been made for the support of a single-payer type system as an option to those who wish that type of coverage.

One point that stood out was this quote from J Nemec @ May 30, 2009 10:01 PM:

"Socialism? INSURANCISM is the 'ism' to be aware of in the Healthcare debate. Why not an "exorcism" of INSURANCISM?

"Insurancism" in it's present form of profiting off the health and well being and/or sickness of others could very well also be called GREEDISM.

The current operating procedures of the for-profit corporate health insurance companies has deteriorated over the past 20 years to the point that the only important thing in the business is the bottom-line profits and what increase in yearly income is generated for the stock market investors from publicly traded corporate profits.

As I had posted earlier, here is an eye-opening stat from Health Care for America Now:

Profits of the 10 largest publicly traded insurers increased 428 percent from 2000 to 2007, from $2.4 billion to $12.9 billion.

I ask you, the reader...

Has your wage or salary gone up 428 percent?

A public single-payer plan must be included in this overhaul and provided as an option to those who wish to have it in place of their current coverage so as to leverage the for-profit companies to keep their health premiums competitive. Plus, there needs to be this option with strong government oversight for those less fortunate who currently have no coverage whatsoever without them being at the mercy of some paper-pusher located on the 24th floor of some high rise.

Think about that ...

House Bill 676

Senate Bill 703

Read them ... if you haven't already done so.

Thanks again for providing this forum.

OldenGoldenDecoy

.

.

Betsy:

Great point ... And very well said.

OldenGoldenDecoy

.

Max Baccus is telling us proponents of Medicare for all, a single payer system, that it won't pass in Congress. Well, folks, who is Congress to tell the American people what we can have and what they say we cannot have?

Congress (except for D. Kucinich) is of the consciousness which created the healthcare crisis! As A. Einstein said, you cannot solve a problem with the consciousness which created it. Until we can elect new congress people to represent us, protest is the only avenue open.

As a self-employed individual, I have tried to navigate this insurance issue. It is complicated...and I only have to worry about myself as I am my only employee.

What I find interesting is hearing that we need people like me to help keep the economic downturn from getting worse. I don't see how that can happen. It isn't even the tax issues I face as a small business owner...that's a whole other ballgame.

One would think that affordable preventative health care would be a prime concern. After all, isn't it more cost effective to stop or control a problem before it gets out of hand?

I am not asking for a handout. I am asking for a solution that allows me the ability to have health care coverage...like anyone in our government. If I develop a serious illness an amass the usual bills we have become accustomed to, I lose my house, my career, and possibly my life. I risk becoming a burden on the Social Security system which in turn affects my fellow tax payers.

Maybe a single payer system as a base with the obvious option to purchase a private policy to make up the differences, an above and beyond kind of thing?

I wouldn't even mind a raise in my taxes if I felt the profiteers in the insurance, pharmachetical, and medical industries would not be able to find a way to profit from even the single payer proposition. And, that's already happening because the powers that be know things will have to change. They are just scrambling to find a profit loop hole. When those loop holes are found, we'll have a single payer system..with a deductible.

"... but since when is health care a birthright? When in the past several; millenia of human history did that happen? Where does the right come from? It isn't in the Constitution. Is it a "natural right?"
from Tim.

Health care defined as medical care, which means diagnosis and treatment of disease, is a human right. It was born out of the realization that all human beings get sick and, when they do, they should have medical diagnosis and treatment.

Medical care is not a right defined in the Constitution because it is not limited to the US public...it is a human right.
The concept has evolved out of an evolution of consciousness, which is ever more inclusive of the common needs of people everywhere. As a humanity, we are subjectively united in our basic human needs: nourishing food, safe shelter, adequate health care and all the education needed to make for a stable, self-sustaining citizenry.

I have BCBS of Georgia, They insure 80% of the people in this rural state. As stated earlier the insurance giant has negotiated away 75% of the bill in most cases. How is this not a single payer system? By changing the system in America to these social ideas we will dissolve all jobs from every sector and the only thing left to do is fight wars, started by the ruling class. When the government owned post office buys a car from Chrysler do they pay full price no they pay 40% because they buy a crap load of vehicles. If you don't have insurance or don't have access to a PPO or a discount plan is that the fault of our government NO. I see all of these liberal minded people who want it both ways. I have the right to this or that service, In these other countries they pay, their employer pays, their gas tax, sin tax, carbon taxes all pay and you can't afford to live like we do in the United States. Hollywood they don't have, Warren Buffet they don't have, Music industry they don't have. If you want Cuba move to Cuba where Doctors male $15/month. If you get sick and don't have insurance and blame the system even though you could have afforded it, but choose to have a new car, or take the low road just hate paying your fair share can we blame the Government.

"Socialism" versus "Insurancism," the Single Payer Debate:

Why isn't single payer plan on the table as a major solution? Please see this report on Bill Moyers -- interviews with good doctors who know what they are talking about. Why not a good look at "Insuranc-ism" instead of "Social-ism?" One could not help but post this after coming across a report on "single payer" insurance on a Saturday evening. It's from a show that some may possibly disapprove of but there is wisdom in it. One can hope one might risk reading this post, and then browse to the interview yourself. PBS. Too many have lost their way.

But wait! There's more!

Do No Harm...will the insurance companies take this oath also along with the good Doctors if "single payer" is ignored?

I'd never thought of "single payer" in the same way as supporting a fire station or a police station or a library. Wasn't it Ben Franklin who put our fire stations in place, and he is remembered with glory.

It brings to mind that there is a difference between social services and "socialism," and it's not a fine line.

There are many who, if they get sick in the current system, have chosen to take their chances rather than fall deeper into the pit of red tape.

Of course, what would you do if you were a CEO that stood to lose so much money from a single payer plan? Could you close your wallet and open your heart?

Now, in this one's role as a facilitator, one wishes that there were fewer caught in this silly system, on all sides, and there are those who feel lost in a system that does not technically permit the use of the word, "healing."

(But Love never fails.)

I wasn't sure what single payer was before this report. Grateful to know there are men and women who really care about others. This is a time for true Heroes. Who doesn't hope that our new President will turn true to the people's need as a National Healer?

Socialism? INSURANCISM is the 'ism' to be aware of in the Healthcare debate. Why not an "exorcism" of INSURANCISM? This "exorcism" must first occur in the human heart -- a shift of point of view, a quiet re-calibration within. This is a time when people (however afraid of the Insurance companies) require new vision, new hope, and true education.

Thank you.

I think the reason they get away with charging people those grotesque fees is because nobody knows what's going on. It's unbelievable that you can go to the doctor, hospital, or lab without being given an estimate of the cost, or at least a written fee schedule for their services, before you agree to be treated. This lack of information prevents individuals from making informed decisions before they assume thousands and thousands of dollars in debt. Every other business provides a fee schedule up front.

We need to stop making excuses for the medical providers, especially as it pertains to the reimbursement formula that they are pressured into by the insurance industry, and expose the whole system to the light of day. Doctors are forced into those reimbusement formulas by the insurance companies, or they won't put that doctor on the list of approved providers for that insurance plan. If they don't agree to accept their reduced reimbursement formula as I've outlined below, they stand to lose a large portion of their patients as customers.

Further, I think they may be prohibited by the contracts they are forced into by the insurance company from public disclosing the insurance companies mandated reduced reimbursement formula and fee schedule to their patients. The insurance companies have a stranglehold on the doctors. This lack of public awareness promotes the situation we are now faced with - people being bankrupted by those grotesque fees when they go to the doctor. It's time for full disclosure so we can debate the actual facts, not those deliberately obscure resource-based relative value scales, global payments, and average outpatient expected payments. It's time for the smoke and mirrors cover-up to end.

I’M GOING TO REPEAT IT AGAIN FOR EMPHASIS SO WE DON’T LOSE SIGHT OF THE PROBLEM BECAUSE IT IS SO OBSCENE:

Most of the major insurance companies have a contract with the medical providers (doctors, labs, and hospitals) to give them a reduced price for their services, which is typically about 65% of the ‘base’ price that is charged only to uninsured patients. Their contracts further stipulate that the insurance companies have to pay only 50% of the base price for the first charge on a given day, and 25% of the base price for the remaining charges for the same day, less the patient’s copay. The formula is:

BASE PRICE x .65 x .50 = 32.50% of the BASE PRICE for the first charge on a given day.

BASE PRICE x .65 x .25 = 16.25% of the BASE PRICE for the second and subsequent charge on a given day.

This means that the insurance companies pay only 16 – 33 % of the base price less the patient’s copay. Thus, you can generally say they pay about 25% of the base price for any medical bill they get. This also means that whenever the doctors and hospitals want to raise their price to the insurance companies by $1, they have to raise the base price to the uninsured by $4.

THIS FORMULA IS COMMONLY USED BY MOST OF THE MAJOR INSURANCE COMPANIES. This happens every day. I've seen these bills myself.

To illustrate:

If a medical procedure "costs" $1200, the insurance company is only asked to pay $300 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $1200, which is a $900 UPCHARGE!

If a medical procedure "costs" $12,000, the insurance company is only asked to pay $3,000 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $12,000, which is a $9,000 UPCHARGE!

If a medical procedure "costs" $120,000, the insurance company is only asked to pay $30,000 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $120,000, which is a $90,000 UPCHARGE!

If a medical procedure "costs" $400,000, the insurance company is only asked to pay $100,000 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $400,000. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT THE INSURANCE COMPANY IS BILLED AND WHAT THE UNINSURED PATIENT IS BILLED IN THIS EXAMPLE IS A $300,000 UPCHARGE!!!

I was told a SIMPLE X-RAY will cost me $1,000 without insurance. The insurance company will only have to pay about $300.

An MRI costs $5,000 without insurance. The insurance company will have to pay about $1,600 for the same test.

It is my understanding that the actual cost of a medical procedure is closer to what the insurance companies pay, or 25% of the billed fee. The 75% “penalty” is what the uninsured get charged because they don't have insurance.

Payment system is pretty complicated, probably too complicated for a newspaper or magazine article.

Lots of systems for lots of insurance companies, but some places to start are resource-based relative value scale, outpatient prospective payment, global payment.

Veronique, I don't care if anyone quotes what I said. In fact, I think everyone should take a look at how they are being affected by that formula. They should outlaw that formula immediately and demand they charge everybody the same price.

Unfortunately, I regret that I still don't want to be identified. Thank you for anything you can do to help get rid of that formula. It's not the same as having insurance, but it would be a great help to people who are facing those grotesque bills.

Veronique, I regret that I don’t wish to identified. I wrote this information so others could look into it to find out why medical bills are so high and causing families to file for bankruptcy. I hope people go to their pile of bills and look at their medical insurance benefit statements. If they don’t have insurance now, they may have had it in the past. If not, perhaps they have relatives who have private health insurance who will let them look at their insurance statements. For many years, I got those statements from various insurance companies and didn’t understand what all the calculations were about. Then I took a medical billing course in an act of desperation to get a permanent job. That’s where I learned about the magic formula that is used by most major insurance companies. I immediately realized the implications of it. Since then, I’ve seen it again on insurance statements for family members, but I’ve never met anyone who knows about it.

It seems to me that if doctors, labs, and hospitals charge the uninsured 4 times the actual cost*, it’s less likely that they’ll pay their bill. This means that only the insurance companies will pay the bills. Then, to generate revenue to make up for their losses, medical providers have to raise their fees to those who are paying the bill (the insurance companies). However, if they have to raise the fees to the uninsured by $4 for every additional $1 they want to get from the insurance company, they make it so that even less of the uninsured will pay the bill. This can only result in rapidly escalating fees for everyone.

Note: The contract the insurance companies have with the medical providers (doctors, labs, and hospitals) to give them a reduced price for their services is their “schedule of reasonable and customary fees”, which they have calculated by averaging fees for the same service from different providers, as I understand it. This amount can vary from one provider to another. I guesstimated it to be 65%. I’ve never seen it be close to the provider’s stated regular/base fee, which is charged to the uninsured.

* As I recall, the practice of charging the uninsured higher fees was designed to be a punitive measure for not having insurance. I think that practice started in the 80's.

Someone needs to check out the news that Canada does not call health care a RIGHT for its citizens because of lawsuits in which Canadians did not get the health care they needed in a timely manner. The legislation came about in order to stop the lawsuits. Commentors really need to google the Canadian Self Study Health Care Report and read it very carefully. This system is often used as a model and it shouldn't be.

Watch the famed Michael Moore Healthcare Documentary online free.

Sicko: http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/sicko/

One final thought. If you have a disabled adult child on medicaid who you try to put on your insurance policy only to find multiple unreasonable and, in the end, insurmountable barriers that make it impossible to get health insurance for your child... If, you try to find a doctor for the adult child on medicaid and are unable to because of the difficulty in finding a doctor that will take medicaid patients... If you are unable to get your adult child in to see a doctor and if you are, as a result, unable to get adequate medical care for your child, how can you, as a parent, use your own health insurance to see a doctor for yourself?

Answer. You can't. You don't.

It's simple. We just march on Washington and demand that members of Congress give us the same health plan they've got.

Fair is fair.

Of course, you've got to get people to march...

I
I'm a French journalist and I wanted to have Jennifer Charles' permission to quote her analysis in a book I am writing. Thank you. Vérnoique

OK. Not to rain on this parade, but since when is health care a birthright? When in the past several; millenia of human history did that happen? Where does the right come from? It isn't in the Constitution. Is it a "natural right?" I really don't think we need to be talking of "rights" etc., and really just need to focus on the policy here. Maybe I'm just being nit-picky, but I think we get farther discussing what needs to be done to implement the policy we want rather than trying to fire everyone up with more "gimme gimme gimme" rhetoric.

In posting this comment, I admittedly have yet to watch this episode of Bill Moyers, which I will promptly do. However, perusing the blog comments previous to pleasured viewing is always enlightening, as well as equal parts frustrating and puzzling.

I say frustrating and puzzling because amid all the supposed support for "single-payer" advocacy, and universal health coverage (versus the old phrase of socialized medicine), I have seen few references to the actual struggle required for enacting this change. I'm not sure if this results from the traditional lack of historical perspective which seems to handicap most Americans' understanding of class struggle, conflict, and civil/human rights, but it astounds me to no bounds when we treat issues which keep resurfacing every decade or generation as something novel and frightening, and there-by believe the change which is needed will come from our elected officials--who have a rather dreary track record in terms of sweeping healthcare revolution.

This country has been through various versions of the same health-care reform movement dating back to the 1830's and 1840's, when the first struggles for factory-workers' rights came to the foreground, (i.e., not losing their jobs due to illness or injury, often inflicted by the risks of their very work; having access to medical care provided by the factory-owners/employers when said workers fell sick or were injured, etc.). These issues evolved through the 20th century in multiple other forms, perhaps the most familiar being the Medicaid/Medicare bills which came to head through the 50's/60's/and 70's, and the grassroots efforts of 80's and 90's in pushing for wider access and affordable coverage for patients with HIV/AIDS.

In addition, one can add the Community Health Clinic expansion of the 60's and 70's, which was snuffed quite effectively for funding cuts by the mid-70's, and so became associated with the charity-care service it is currently relegated to.

Incidentally, there were efforts to introduce Universal Health coverage going on in the 1930's and 40's, all of which were stomped out for varied reasons--prime amongst them, private health-care lobbyists in Washington who funneled the paranoia of the times, citing communist/socialist conspiracies, and the involvement of the AMA in it's explicit defense of specialized/segregated care over a broader base of access for all people, provided by primary care providers working in a preventative/community health-care model. Why these past efforts failed or were so limited in terms of their original form (i.e.,why Medicare is only for disabled or elderly rather than for all people), resulted from the very little citizen involvement in any of these past efforts at SWEEPING healthcare change. This has been interpreted as a prime failure, both in terms of legislating for universal healthcare, and as a reflection of our supposed vibrant PEOPLE'S democracy.

The participation of socially minded healthcare professionals is essential in this movement, but I heartily believe for all the wonking/honking/and online blog efforts from doctors, nurses, social workers, etc/etc, there will be no drive to mobilize an effective and compassionate healthcare reform unless you try to rally your patients--THE COMMON CITIZENS--as well.

The point I'm trying to make here is that for all the legislative efforts regarding "Medicare for all, bill 676" or some such non-sequitor, for all the Bill Moyer's episodes and Michael Moore specs, until you have individual communities made up of citizens advocating for their own rights, of which healthcare is simply a single issue amongst so many in our gradually dissolving democracy, we will fail.

And for the segmented successes which this country has made upon issues of broadening access to quality-funded healthcare, it has happened due to the grassroots efforts of citizens--seniors marching for Medicare, HIV/AIDS patients and their loved ones, rallying for their right to equal health-care access and coverage.

We cloud this argument in terms of consumer choice, and private insurance industry "cost-to-benefit" analyses, to confuse and befuddle both the American citizen and people who would be advocates of universal healthcare coverage. The argument becomes a matter of consumer choice and not one of basic human right, and this is the fundamental flaw upon which all legislative efforts stand. This healthcare movement needs to be a revolution, no reform, and it goes beyond class, educational status, socio-economic demographic, or employment benefits.

I am in agreement with others who are quite confounded as to why Americans seem so blase and complacent with this issue. The answer is we're quite good at responding to polls, and posting on computers--not so good, anymore, at direct community action and grassroots, get-out-on-the street-and-march-on-Washington. We work 3 jobs to keep our benefits, without realizing what we've lost in the interim in regards to our civil rights, and so healthcare goes un-reformed, and public involvement is unrealized.

In the late 60's and early 70's, when local neighborhood advocacy groups suddenly woke-up to the dreary condition of America's inner-city precincts, the gaping disparities in illness and disease outcomes between poor localities and inhabitants of more affluent neighborhoods, the Community Health Center movement was born. It was coupled with the civil rights struggle, and for a brief span of time, flourished in potential.

One wonders, as the economy withers, and more people lose their jobs, or take pay cuts to simply keep their dismal paycheck, and communities suffer as a result, how Americans will respond this time around, both to advocating for their own right to publicly supported universal healthcare, and realize it in the context of human-rights, rather than a "healthcare privilege" or a "benefit".

I applaud the single payer plan because it will foster the idea that health care is a birthright not a privilege.

Thank you for the great discussion on single payer programs. The simplicity of single payer programs is clearly confounded by the financial interests of the insurance industry. Perhaps it will take further disintegration of our financial systems before the inevitable embrace of the single payer system is finally adopted. I hope not, but I fear this will be the outcome

Should the U.S. pursue single-payer universal health coverage? Why or why not?

Of course the U.S. should pursue single-payer! The reasons were abundantly made clear in your interview with both doctors, Mr. Moyers!

1) Eliminate the private health insurance industry whose job it is to limit access to healthcare and whose primary focus is profit

2) Single-payer is the only plan that actually provides universal coverage. It allows for private hospitals and doctors to continue to function in a private practice and they bill the government their expenses, which is paid for by taxation on every citizen.

# Is single-payer universal health insurance politically feasible?

Yes, it is politically feasible. All it takes is for the head of the house of representatives, Pelosi, Senator Harry Reid and Obama to champion single-payer and hold town hall meetings throughout the United States educating the misinformed masses about what is actually single payer. It is not "socialized medicine" but actually providing national health insurance for every man, woman and child. Citizens can still choose whatever doctor they wish. Uncle Sam pays the tab.

# Are there any alternative models for health care that are being left out of the discussion or that you support?

The only alternative model that is not being sufficiently discussed and is being left out of the national debate on health care is single-payer. And this is because the private health insurance industry is dead set against it as it would lead to the destruction of their model of providing health insurance.

The private health insurance industry is a hideous institution that will do everything in its power to fight single-payer. If only the American people would wake up and learn the truth about single payer. They would support it in droves.

IT’S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE WAY THE MEDICAL PROVIDERS CALCULATE THE BILL FOR THE UNINSURED. THIS IS OBSCENE, BUT NO ONE SEEMS TO BE AWARE OF THIS.

(Please bear with me while I provide this long example again. I tried to revise it so it’s more understandable. I got some information from someone I know in Canada. I’ve spent many years analyzing the income and expenses of individuals and families and have also studied medical expenses. I know the only way to get the picture of what is happening inside people’s homes is to follow it through on a step by step basis. My situation is not nearly as bad as most of the other uninsured, at least not yet, but this is how families and individual’s lives begin to be destroyed by this system. One average illness or accident and it’s the beginning of the end for your family as you can see if you follow the billing examples I gave.)

Whenever people complain about the rising cost of health care, they are usually talking about the rising cost of the insurance premiums that are deducted from the paychecks of employees who have health care benefits. It seems that some people are having a difficult time paying the $30 - 50 dollar increase in their monthly premium. This is a problem the uninsured would like to have.

It seems that no one knows about the payment formula that the insurance companies force on the medical industry, or how it is applied to the uninsured.

Most of the major insurance companies have a contract with the medical providers (doctors, labs, and hospitals) to give them a reduced price for their services, which is typically about 65% of the ‘base’ price that is charged only to uninsured patients. Their contracts further stipulate that the insurance companies have to pay only 50% of the base price for the first charge on a given day, and 25% of the base price for the remaining charges for the same day, less the patient’s copay. The formula is:

BASE PRICE x .65 x .50 = 32.50% of the BASE PRICE for the first charge on a given day.
BASE PRICE x .65 x .25 = 16.25% of the BASE PRICE for the second and subsequent charge on a given day.

This means that the insurance companies pay only 16 – 33 % of the base price less the patient’s copay. Thus, you can generally say they pay about 25% of the base price for any medical bill they get. This also means that whenever the doctors and hospitals want to raise their price to the insurance companies by $1, they have to raise the base price to the uninsured by $4.

THIS FORMULA IS COMMONLY USED BY MOST OF THE MAJOR INSURANCE COMPANIES. This happens every day. I've seen these bills myself.

To illustrate:

If a medical procedure "costs" $1200, the insurance company is only asked to pay $300 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $1200, which is a $900 UPCHARGE!

If a medical procedure "costs" $12,000, the insurance company is only asked to pay $3,000 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $12,000, which is a $9,000 UPCHARGE!

If a medical procedure "costs" $120,000, the insurance company is only asked to pay $30,000 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $120,000, which is a $90,000 UPCHARGE!

If a medical procedure "costs" $400,000, the insurance company is only asked to pay $100,000 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $400,000. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT THE INSURANCE COMPANY IS BILLED AND WHAT THE UNINSURED PATIENT IS BILLED IN THIS EXAMPLE IS A $300,000 UPCHARGE!!!

I was told a SIMPLE X-RAY will cost me $1,000 without insurance. The insurance company will only have to pay about $300.

An MRI costs $5,000 without insurance. The insurance company will have to pay about $1,600 for the same test.

It is my understanding that the actual cost of a medical procedure is closer to what the insurance companies pay, or 25% of the billed fee. The 75% “penalty” is what the uninsured get charged because they don't have insurance.

The most upsetting thing about rising health care costs is not that the insured patient’s deductible is rising, but that their insurance companies have forced the medical providers to charge the uninsured four times (400%) of what they, the multibillion dollar insurance companies, pay, on average. To make this possible, they have put forth the view that people who don’t have insurance are lazy, unskilled, stupid, or unwilling to contribute to an insurance plan. However, most of the uninsured are working, but their employers will not provide insurance. While they are busy convincing the public that the attitude of the uninsured is the problem, they have neglected to show the truth about what they are charging to private individuals for insurance. Their private insurance plans cost about $700 to $2,000 per month, while the typical uninsured worker earns only $1,200 to $2,400 per month before taxes. It’s very difficult, if not nearly impossible, to pay for food, housing, transportation, etc. with these wages, long before health care costs are added.

If you assume the average person who gets insurance at work pays a monthly premium of $100 per month, it means they pay about $1,200 per year in premiums. Further, if you assume they pay about $50 per month in copays, it means they pay about $600 per year out of pocket for medical expenses. Thus, the average person that gets insurance at work contributes about $1,800 per year for health care out of their own money. Most of their health care is paid for by their employer, and is untaxable. (Generally, this adds another $12,000 in untaxed benefits to the annual income of the insured employee. Compare this to the uninsured individual, who earns less (even before the untaxed value of the insurance premiums are added), and is typically forced to pay the extra $1,800 “penalty” just for one diagnostic test, and is in no position to get follow-up testing, doctor supervised care, or any treatment. Instead of having the playing field leveled after putting out the $1,800 penalty, which is comparable to the out of pocket expenses of the insured patients, they continue to extort massive sums from the uninsured. There is simply no reason for the uninsured to even go to a doctor because they can’t afford to find out what is actually wrong or get the subsequent treatment.

The majority of people who have health care provided by their employer would not be able to purchase health care if their employer stopped providing it. They are not "better" people than the uninsured. Where I live, jobs that pay $20,000 to $30,000 (with a growing number who have no medical insurance) per year are the norm, but the media gives you the impression that there are a lot of people who make much higher salaries, $50,000 - $100,000. Only those employed in the medical industry get the higher wages. There are very few people who can afford to purchase health care insurance without a subsidy from their employer; there are very few uninsured people who can afford to pay the grotesquely inflated medical expenses that are 400% higher than what the insurance companies pay. There is a war being waged by the medical industry against the uninsured, who are held in contempt by many in the medical industry. Any contact with a hospital will ruin their lives and destroy their families – bankruptcy, foreclosure, homelessness – it is virtually inevitable. The health care providers don’t care. They feel it’s their duty to charge these grotesque fees to the uninsured.

Some people seem to believe that it is our fault we don’t have insurance because we don’t work for an employer who provides insurance, and we don’t purchase it. First, there are very few jobs offering insurance today. The people who have insurance from their employers got it years ago in most cases. The jobs with insurance are few and far between. The insurance offered today, is unaffordable to the people who can’t get it at work. The jobs without insurance pay much less than the jobs that offer insurance. It’s like getting hit from both sides – lower salaries AND no benefits. Then, the biggest insult is that we get charged 4 times what the people with benefits and higher salaries get charged when we seek medical care. It’s unbelievable what poor math skills the people in the medical industry have when they decide who can afford to pay the most for the same treatment. It’s also ironic that the “caring” profession is so cruel and inhumane toward people who can’t find a job with insurance.

Personally, I tried to purchase an inexpensive health insurance plan. They charge me $100 per month, the same amount as the premiums paid by those employees who get insurance from their employer, except that my employer doesn’t contribute a dime. I want to contribute, to pay my fair share, so I signed up. Unfortunately, the cut-rate insurance company I pay benefits to won’t pay for much of anything. My annual limit on benefits is the amount I pay for my premiums, which is $1,200. The health plans provided by most employers have annual benefit limits typically of $200,000 to $500,000 – quite a bit more than my $1,200 limit. (That’s one thousand two hundred dollars versus two hundred thousand dollars or more!) Unfortunately, I had to go to the emergency room and they wouldn’t pay any of it. My other visits to the doctor’s office were excluded by my cut-rate insurance company through numerous deductibles and copays. They only real benefit I get is that some doctors will reduce their price to people on that plan, which I understand is simply an agreement for the doctor to offer me a lower fee without reimbursement by the insurance company. Essentially, the insurance company keeps what I pay to them, and some doctors will reduce my bill without insurance reimbursement, but no serious tests or emergency care. It’s a joke. (Since I am partially disabled and haven’t had medical insurance or serious medical care in 6 years, I need real medical care, at least initially.) If the doctors would just give me the reduced rate without using the insurance plan, instead of charging me 4 times the actual cost, I would be able to use the money I now pay to the cut-rate insurance company for premiums to pay the doctor’s bills.

I want to state that I am a “temporary” employee without benefits who has been working at the same job for several years. I sit next to many permanent employees who have benefits. Several years ago the company I work for stopped hiring permanent employees with benefits. However, they still needed warm bodies to keep the company running so they invented “temporary” positions that don’t offer insurance. In the geographic region where I live, hiring “temporary” employees without benefits, to supplement full time employees with benefits, to save the company money is a common practice. Therefore, you could say that the “temps” are keeping the company alive so it can pay the benefits to the permanent employees. Thus, we are subsidizing the benefits and salaries of the permanent employees by giving our services for half price. Then, we get charged 400% more for our uninsured medical expenses! That sounds fair doesn’t it?

I just got off the phone with someone I know in Canada. They pay a 13% hospital tax on most items except food, such as cars, gas, furniture, soda, laundry detergent, etc. I don't know how their income taxes compare to ours. They have to wait about 2 weeks to get an appointment with a doctor. She thought she recalled having to wait about 6 weeks to get an MRI in a non-emergency situation. She wasn’t sure how long you would have to wait for care if you had cancer. She expressed difficulty finding a doctor she liked (2 moved, she didn’t like 2 others). All her medical expenses are paid for except that she pays $65/mo for a prescription plan. She is very old, so it was a little difficult to sort out every part of what she was saying, but she was positive about the Canadian health system overall.

Thanks, Bill Moyers, for all the years that you have given your honest and unique assessment and provided such special information to our citizens. There is no one on any TV station as brave or as fine as you are.

We truly would need a non-biased Single Payer Plan and may even save money by providing another alternative, integrative medicine. We need safer and better methodology for those who have life-threatening reactions to prescription drugs and others who want to prevent surgery. Thank you for this opportunity to express our views.

We keep hearing about the 60 percent who favor single payer. I'll bet the good majority of the rest already have the government paying for their healthcare (i.e. medicare,medicaid,VA etc.). So they're presently happy and may be afraid of losing their government care, which they obviously wouldn't with single payer. Once this is pointed out, those favoring single payer may surpass 90%.

The mainstream media does it's best to stifle the conversation and skew the polling. If someone tried to slide "single payer" into a discussion, I'd bet they'd bleep it out. Congress has.

I lived in the UK/Ireland for several years, and had both my babies there (one in England, the other in Ireland.) I found the system to be simple, effective and efficient. It seemed that doctors were far less wasteful there. Recently, here in Los Angeles, my dad was hospitalized, and I saw the amount of waste that goes on--nothing is re-used, everything is disposable. Gloves, tubes, you name it, every ten minutes something went into the trash. It is shocking, not just for the prices we pay, but for the cost to the environment in squandered plastic. I've heard the elderly, conservative friends of my father claim that in the UK you have to go an a waiting list if you need surgery, and that the system is terrible, but I can tell you that isn't true. Their system is more efficient and supportive than ours, by a long shot. And it is free to everyone. Not just the poor. Health care is something they simply don't have to worry about. I want to ask you all to imagine what your current circumstances would be like if your income taxes were a few percentage points higher, but you didn't have to pay for health insurance, and you didn't have to pay for your children's (or your own) college education. And both systems worked better than they do here (at our exorbitant prices.) I'm currently working as a pastry chef at a job I hate because I get health insurance through it, and fear taking a job I want because I'd have to pay hundreds of dollars for health insurance and, though I would make more money at the new job, all of it would go toward tuition, since my (still pathetic) higher salary would cut drastically the student grants I get for my two college-age daughters. This system is broken beyond repair. Let's ditch it and adopt one that all other industrialized countries have embraced long ago--free (or almost free) health care for all.

The truth is simple: single-payer WORKS. We see it demonstrated in other countries. The alternative DOESN'T WORK. We see that every day in this country.

It's a no brainer. The fact that it hasn't happened is only proof of how powerful corporate interests are in our political system.

If you'd like to understand why we are not likely to get single payer, you need to change your paradigm to one related to cost. I can explain it if you want to take the time. I live near Boston which you no doubt visit from time to time.

Yes, we should pursue the single-payer option and it SHOULD be politically feasible.

I recently sent the message below to my elected representatives. Haven't heard back from them yet.

"You and other federal employees have the best health care money can buy, thanks to the generosity of the American taxpayer. What if you began paying for your own health care so you'd have a better understanding of what the rest of us are dealing with, with high costs and poor coverage? That savings could then go into a fund to help pay for candidates who choose to run using a public funding option (Fair Elections Now Act).

"The math is simple. Campaign contributions from those who favor the status quo are why we don't have a health care system that works for most Americans. Public funding of elections will allow those candidates who choose it to work for the people instead of the special interests."

The comment made by Mr. Gordon that " The inescapable fact is that only the profit motive and competition keep enterprises lean,efficient,innovative and customer friendly" is far from the truth unless of course you can afford one of the new boutique practices. I cannot and neith can most of the people in this Country. He takes an elitist view of healthcare which is how many politicians and corporate bosses see this. Our healthcare system in this Country is one of the most user unfriendly systems. I cannot begin to tell you of the nightmares my husband and I went through when he had to go to an emergency room in California. The record keeping, and the phone calls and the retelling of our story to the hospital billing office took over a year to straighten out. This is not what I call efficient, innovative or customer friendly. Mr. Gordon needs to step into some of our shoes before he and others like him open their mouths to give advice.
Single payer, is the wisent, mot cost effective, and efficient method of providing healthcare for all of us.

.

Thanks for the heads-up Maragret

For those here who found Margaret's post for the May 30th: National Day of Action a bit confusing you may wish to use this direct link.

healthcare-now.org/campaigns/may-30th-day-of-action/

Additional links at that page on the left side of the window will assist you in finding the actual locations in your particular area or region.

Thanks again Margaret.

OldenGoldenDecoy

.

For those of you ready to take action:http://www.healthcare-now.org

May 30th: National Day of Action

Nationwide Rallies for Improved Medicare for All
Join thousands of single-payer supporters in a nationwide week of action to support improved Medicare for all (HR 676).

Single-payer activists will be gathering all over the country to say, "Healthcare, yes; Insurance companies, no," and to show solidarity with demonstrations at the AHIP (American Health Insurance Plans, a private health insurance lobby) conference in San Diego.
If an action isn't already in your city, plan your own day of action! It can be a town hall meeting, demonstration in front of a local insurance company, film showing, vigil, or your own unique idea. Let us know what you'd like to start planning by contacting info@healthcare-now.org.
47 million Americans are uninsured. Private insurance rates are rising faster than inflation and our incomes. By 2025 the cost of private health insurance will exceed our projected income.

A national, single-payer healthcare system is the only healthcare reform option that will cover every American resident while saving us billions of dollars. The majority of Americans want it. The majority of physicians want it. The only thing missing is the political will in Washington.
Improved Medicare for All: We can do it!
Sponsored by:
The Leadership Conference for Guaranteed Health Care
Healthcare-NOW!
Progressive Democrats of America
CNA/National Nurses Organizing Committee
Physicians for a National Health Program
Americans for Democratic Action
Green Party
Take Action
Join Us!

Healthcare-NOW! is always looking for volunteers and organizers who are committed to passing national, single-payer legislation in the US. As a national organization, we are connected to over 400 activists in all fifty states. Join us!
In the past, we have organized nationwide protests, vigils, teach-ins, and road shows that have garnered national attention.
So please, contact us if you’re interested. You can email us at info[at]healthcare-now.org or call 800-453-1305.

10 Ways to Take Action Now
 Call your congressional representatives and ask that they cosponsor and actively advocate for HR 676. Call toll free 1-866-338-1015
 Donate to Healthcare-NOW!
 Organize a Road Show event in your community or state. View our Road Show page for ideas on how to organize.
 Vote for candidates who support HR 676–find single-payer candidates at www.sickocure.org.
 Circulate a petition supporting HR 676 - Download the petition here
 Host a screening of SiCKO or other movies (see our recommended movie list) that highlight the U.S. healthcare crisis. Discuss the problem and the single-payer solution.
 Organize a Truth Hearing in your congressional district. Find out how on our Truth Hearing Page.
 Demonstrate in front of insurance companies. Find out how in our Protest Toolkit.
 Tell your story. If you or your loved ones have experienced a healthcare horror story, share it with the Healthcare-NOW. Read Death by Spreadsheet.
 Distribute information to your coworkers, friends, and family. Find great handouts on our Resources Page to share with anyone or order booklets and information from the Resources page.
Days of action happening in:
Albany, NY - May 27th
Atlana, GA - May 27th
Augusta, ME - May 30th
Austin, TX - May 30th
Billings, MT - May 16th
Boise, ID - May 30th
Boston, MA - May 30th
Chicago, IL - June 2nd
Cleveland, OH - May 30th
Denver, CO - May 30th
Des Moines, IA - May 28th - June 3rd
Elmwood Park, NJ - June 5
El Paso, TX - May 30th
Fenton, MI - May 21st
Fort Collins, CO - May 30th
Gainesville, FL - May 28th & 30th
Grand Rapids, MI - May 30th
Greeley, CO - May 30th
Hastings-On-Hudson, NY - May 30th
Iowa City, IA - May 30th
Indianapolis, IN - May 20th
Kent, OH - May 30th
Lawrence, KS - May 30th
Los Angeles, CA - TBA
Louisville, KY - May 28th
Madison, WI - May 29th
Middleton, CT - May 28th
Minneapolis, MN - May 31st
Nashville, TN - May 30th
New Albany, IN - May 30th
New York City, NY - May 30th
Northfield, MN - May 30th
Philadelphia, PA - May 30th
Pittsburgh, PA - May 29th
Phoenix, AZ - May 30th
Pontiac, MI - June 16th
Portland, OR - May 27th
Princeton, NJ - May 31st
Pueblo, CO - June 2nd
Reno, NV - May 31st
Rochester, NY - May 30th
San Diego, CA - June 3rd
San Francisco, CA - May 29th
Seattle, WA - May 30th
Sioux Falls, SD - May 30th
Springfield, MA - May 27th
Tacoma, WA - May 30th
Tampa, FL - May 28th
Topeka, KS - May 30th
Towson, MD - May 30th
Wheaton, MD - May 30th
White Plains, NY - May 30th
Your city or town not listed? Let us know that you'd like to organize an event on May 30th.
CAMPAIGN HEADLINES
Single-Payer Activists met in Nashville, TN for Healthcare Rally
October 6, 2008 - Debby Hester of Healthcare-NOW! Nashville and PNHP in Tennessee were able to get a speaker on... Read more»
Activist Report Back from Healthcare Rally in Houston, TX
A report from Houston TX - Houston’s RALLY for Health Care Reform was held on 10/4/08 and marked our first single-payer... Read more»
CNA walked Golden Gate Bridge in support of HR 676
Single Payer Activists led by 1000 convention delegates from the California Nurses Association walked San Francisco’s...

"Don't despair, Chris, for someday these same persons will be chronically ill,injured, disabled, infirm, needing medical attention they can't afford or have a loved one they care about in those straits. Not even the most positive outlook or an obsessive-compulsive lookout can keep one safe and healthy forever."

Though I try hard to keep away from posting, I felt compel to respond to the persons comments.
I was looking, thinking and analyzing the issues from same points of views as you
and all others on this board. Thanks, keep up the good work.

NO ONE should try and profit off of your health. Profit and Health do not mix, just like oil and water. Unfortunately the people who decide are on the side of profit. They need to be stopped and voted all out of office. My family came to this country becasue we belived it was a democracy, where the will of the people is stronger than those who have money. Let's hope democracy continues the way it was intended. One last thing, Shame on Barack Obama or changing his views on this issue to lean towards the side of profit.

Chris: There is such a thing as an argument from blissful ignorance. And there is such a think as mistaking personal good fortune in the present for meritorious superiority. You will find that those who oppose single payer healthcare extremely , short sighted, self-centered and of limited experience as concerns illness, suffering and medical bills. These kinds of persons would oppose highway building, thinking they could hack through the frontier in their SUV and then charge others a toll. You will often find they are in a predatory employment or work for someone who is. Don't dispair, Chris, for someday these same persons will be chronically ill,injured, disabled, infirm, needing medical attention they can't afford or have a loved one they care about in those straits. Not even the most positive outlook or an obsessive-compulsive lookout can keep one safe and healthy forever. As in the recent pandemic scare, we realize the truth that humanity is a herd, that health is collective and pervasive, and that no citizen in this crowded world can ever go it alone anymore. What you see in the opposition is obedience to the exploitive class in hope of crumbs and trickle, or maybe a tantrum against the undeniable reality that organizing for health care as a right is good and will lead to other improvements and reforms. When people realize that we need no parasites to make this system work they will find other applications of the model (i.e.:collective self-employment, community food and energy production).(Picture a hardy individualist treating his own cancer with survivalist tools and you will understand my reasoning, Chris.)

Posted by Gary Halpin,
"I will not try and stop you. All I ask is you make it voluntary to join and
voluntary to opt out. Then maybe others, like myself, can attempt to build
a true free-market system, which will also be 100% voluntary to join and leave.
Isn't this freedom of choice? Isn't this fair? Or does universal healthcare
FORCE everyone into it, whether they want it or not.
Isn't this no freedom? Isn't this unfair?"

FREEDOM of CHOICE, FAIR, EQUALITY, JUSTICE, LAWS,
TRUE DEMOCRACY ETC. is when the people are EMPOWERD TO
EXPRESS THEIR "WILL ON ALL ISSUES"!

To make it "fair, freedom of choice..." etc. for ALL,

"AMEND THE CONSTITUTION"!
EMPOWER THE PEOPLE TO EXPRESS "THEIR WILL ON ALL ISSUES"!

IT WILL BE "VERY VOLANTARY"! It Will be on the table for every one.
As someone said, "JUST THE WAY THE DOCTOR ORDERS" FOR ALL.
You state, "Isn't this unfair?" You do want "to be FAIR", don't you!
Place "ALL ISSUES on the BALLOT, so we can "ALL EXPRESS OUR WILL".

It is not a "FREE-MARKET SYTEM" when the three TRILLION DOLARS were
appropriated and approved by OLIGARCHY to bail out the corrupt banking system,
and left a "12 year child to die of infection, or let a women bleed to death on the floor....".
A parent "did not have $80.00 dollars" to pay a doctor, to save a "child life"!
A parent, a "mother", one of 50 millions, uninsured lost a child!

Many commenters make the erroneous assumption that single-payer is somehow "socialized" medicine.

As a Canadian, I will reiterate that this is not correct. The government acts as an insurance company that pays self-employed physicians. Our doctors don't work in clinics paid for by the state: they pay for their supplies, their rent and all the other costs of running a business out of revenue from treatments.

This is a key reason why our system is so much more efficient than the US system: our doctors have to find efficiencies to maximize profit. At the same time, in the US, doctors serving insured patients have an artificially lowered rate of costly patients, because these are disproportionately eliminated by the system.

We understand what socialism is, and our medical system isn't it. I fear that the term, used in the generally right-wing comments betrays more an inclination to fear, uncertainty and doubt than a basic knowledge of the issue.

To President Obama: We are starting from scratch, because presently, we don't have a health care delivery system that benefits everyone. To Mr. Baucus, your day of reckoning, and your deep-pockets relationship with the health insurance industry, is at hand, and will soon be put to an end. For the millions of uninsured families, your energies may be duly directed toward an active political surge of pressure and loud voices until the one and obvious single-payer health care plan is forged. Imagine, boys and girls, a nation of citizens and their employers who never again have to add the cost of health care to their contract negotiations, only salaries, vacations and bonuses. Imagine how much more money would be available for such without healthcare being thrust upon corporations and small businesses. This would be an automatic economic stimulus package as well as a universal healthcare plan for the nation. The silly sounds of single-payer naysayers will only get sillier as time wears on.
Amen.
MH Pathfinder

It is NOT ONLY the insurance companies. It goes much deeper - to the very roots of our society, and we need a huge and comprehensive reform.
Think about causes and then - costs of obesity and so-called 'life-style disease' of our people.
Think about pharmaceutical companies, their endless commercials and their super-profits, too.
Think about thousands of heart surgeries that should have been replaced with preventative treatment, and their costs also.
Think about a doctor who charges his patient and patient's insurance $200 for the 1.25 hours in a waiting room and a 15-min of 'do-nothing' consultation that follows. (This is from my very own and very recent experience).
I guess, nobody knows now what solution we should go with. The whole system seems to be deeply rotten. But we have the rights to try and we still have - I just hope - the voting power to fix it.

Margaret Heckler,

Great post and thanks for the ''ugly'' HC Industry stats !!!!!!

Why is the MSM silent about all this, as many of us have wondered? Are they also part of this ''Corporate Conspiracy'' that we have come to suspect ??

I also think single-payer is the goal, but with unemployment rising, perhaps an abrupt switch would only cause that to be worse. It would also give Republicans a talking point in coming elections, since Obama campaigned for choice. He probably knows that it will become single-payer sooner rather than later if it just gets started!

Bill,
Thank you for your program on this particular subject. I was not aware of what single-payer healthcare was. Your program provided a lot of information for why single payer healthcare makes a lot of common sense.

I was happy that pbs finally gave some time to this issue. No doubt about it, there is a media black out on this issue and the American people should be up in arms at just that insult to our democracy! Having said that I was disappointed that your poll did not include a vote for single payer. I am against any plan that includes the for-profit companies. I am against any plan that is just another patch on this leaking dike of an excuse for US health care.

It might interest people to know that the US Justice Department has collected over $21 billion dollars (yes, BILLION! ) in fraud settlements since 1986 from insurance companies and other health care companies engaged in fraud against the government (Medicare, Medicaid etc). For fiscal year 2008 the DOJ secured $1.34 Billion in settlements and judgments of which $1.12 BILLION were related to health care. (DOJ Report released 11/10/2008).

When our politicians, government officials and the President say there is not enough money for a single payer system I say how can that be if the health care CEOs are making more money than any other industry's CEOs (for example, Aetna CEO Williams makes $19.8 million in total compensation (WSJ April 2009) and the US government has recovered $21 billion from crooked health care insurers and other companies. And this is just the fraud committed against the government - how many more billions have each state's attorney general secured in fraud cases against consumers? When I hear Senator Max Baucus and the lobbyist Karen Ignagni state that we have to come up with a solution to our country’s health care problems that is “uniquely American” I want to scream – what does that mean? That we cannot learn from other countries how to fix this issue? That only a capitalistic solution will be an “American” solution”?. What is “uniquely American” in this debacle is that we are the ONLY industrial nation that allows its citizens to go bankrupt because of medical bills, we are the ONLY industrialized nation that spends 1/3 of every health care dollar on administration, marketing and salaries, We are the ONLY industrialized nation that does not regulate the drug companies, we are the ONLY industrialized nation that lets its citizens die because of how much money they have or the color of their skin – if that is how we define “uniquely American” I want no part of it!

A recent fraud case that may interest people is a class action law suit brought against United Health Care, Aetna, Wellpoint, Oxford, CIGNA and others by NYS Attorney General Cuomo. Turns out that the data base used by the insurance companies to calculate reimbursement rates for out-of –network providers, owned by a company called Ingenix, is itself owned 100% by United Health Care, - is nothing but fake numbers. United Health Care just settled for $50 Million, Aetna for $40 Million and they paid $350 Million to the AMA in settlement. "For the past ten years American patients have suffered from unfair reimbursements for critical medical services due to a conflict-ridden system that has been owned, operated and manipulated by the health care industry."(Attorney General Cuomo Announces Historic Nationwide Health Insurance Reform - Jan 13, 2009).

When President Obama states that he will not be the one responsible for "destroying the health care industry" he is defending known crooks, liars and murderers! I say to the President that he should have no qualms about destroying this so called "industry" as it has no qualms about destroying America. The for-profit players will not be happy until they have bankrupted this nation and suck Americans dry. We have more to fear from them then we ever have from “terrorists”)!

Respectfully,

Margaret Heckler
Stratford, CT

I just sent this to Speaker Pelosi at AmericanVoices@mail.house.gov

Dear Speaker Pelosi,

Please prevent Max Baucus and the health profiteers from turning the health care debate into the healthcare de bait and switch. He says everything is on the table - then says single-payer is not on the table. Maybe you should form an independent commission of people who do not derive campaign funds and other revenue from this industry to analyze the merits of single-payer. It would be more beneficial than this rush that reminds me so much of the Bush administration approach on important matters. This country needs a factual comparison of private insurance and single payer's effects in the USA and other countries regarding access to care, health costs and outcomes. We need real FACTS - not the opinion of those who profit and should be disqualified from the process. I wrote a poem for the occasion.

Our social safety net is torn,
because in the USA we were born.

The industrialized world has medical care,
but not over here, only over there.

Our medical coverage is poor,
the insurance predator is at the door.

Our nest egg and healthcare are broken,
but Max Baucus and the lobbyists have spoken.

Our government says their help we don’t need,
will they overcome greed when we bleed if we plead? 

They say single-payer is off the table,
let's vote them out as soon as we're able.

But the C.E.O.’s will sleep tight tonight,
because they got the TARP and don’t share our plight.

They can’t understand - why all the fuss,
If their security blanket suffocates the rest of us. 

I support a single-payer national health care system because our present system is broken at its core. All that is required to create a fair and equitable system is political will, and that will can be mobilized if a sufficient number of Americans speak truth to the entrenched power and greed of private-sector insurance carriers and providers with a single word: "Enough."

Gary Halpin must be one of the healthy Americans with no preexisting conditions who thinks there is a "free market" of health care choices. The insurance industry has actually made sure there is "no market" for millions of Americans with preexisting conditions.

Insurance only works when the costs are distributed over the whole market, not just the healthy ones. HR 676 is the solution.

.

In reference to Linda Mae @ May 26, 2009 3:31 AM

Health Care in the US is currently, and has at least for the past 60 years been subject to "rationing" by the forces of for-profit corporations, both from within the insurance and the provider interests. No ifs, ands or buts...

Although, I do apprecaite the input from the likes of Linda Mae in these discussions. It highlights exactly why there is a majority of thinking people in our country who now see the clear need to move progressively forward into the future and not be weighed down, nor stuck in the past by those who feel that the status quo is perfectly fine with them, so it must be fine for everyone else.

Linda, as an old dearly departed friend of mine once wrote:

"Always try and keep what's real near. If what's real makes you feel secure. Or reality might disappear..."

Now... as you sail on through life... may the warm wind at your back be your own.

OldenGoldenDecoy

.

.

To Amigo @ May 26, 2009 1:10 PM

I hear you ... and hundreds of thousands hear you too.

OldenGoldenDecoy

.

This was in response to the comment that there was no sense of debate about the single-payer issue. It is true that most of the program time was allocated to single-payer advocates. Considering that there has been an almost complete shutout of the single-payer idea in the corporate-owned mainstream media (except for negative comments that are frequently based on untruths), and considering that not even one single-payer advocate was allowed to sit around a table of 15 "well-connected" guests at the Senate Finance Committee Roundtables (although polls have indicated that more than 60% of the people favor this option), I would say that Bill Moyer's coverage was very fair. He was trying to give some badly needed "equal time" although there is no way that one program can make up for the years of "unequal time" sponsored by media outlets that have a financial interest in keeping things the way they are.

So there is obviously a high demand for this magical single-payer, universal health care system, which will completely nationalize (i.e. socialize) the medical industry. While most proponents believe it is the free-market that has failed, I would estimate that we are already well beyond 50% of the medical industry being nationalized, socialized, and an even higher percentage being regulated. In other words, it ain't no free-market system.

So here is my offer. Since there is such a demand for magic, why can't all those who are in favor of single-payer, or universal healthcare (UH) pool their resources and go for it. I will not try and stop you. All I ask is you make it voluntary to join and voluntary to opt out. Then maybe others, like myself, can attempt to build a true free-market system, which will also be 100% voluntary to join and leave. Isn't this freedom of choice? Isn't this fair? Or does universal healthcare FORCE everyone into it, whether they want it or not. Isn't this no freedom? Isn't this unfair?

People sing the praises of the employer-based insurance system but not only does it not cover the unemployed, it ties people into jobs they don't want. It holds many talented people back from potential entrepreneurship, something this country should support.

Based on talking to my friends, if they could get decent healthcare outside their current employment, they would quit and be self-employed.

Hence, employer-based insurance keeps employees from quitting even as pay and working conditions are lousy. It traps workers and keeps them from going out on their own an innovating, and probably competing with their former employers!

Perhaps that's why businesses lobby against single-payer. It may be the last thing keeping their labor force captive.

Carol B
(self employed for 17 years)

There are several fallacies within your argument, Linda Mae.

Not everyone whose finances are effectively ruined because of medical bills files for bankruptcy. We didn't. That doesn't change the fact that the insurance company we had went to great lengths to get rid of us nor does it change the fact that the price tag on just our child's medicine alone was more than 3 times our entire income which was why the insurance company went to such great lengths to get rid of us.

The health insurance industry rations health care currently for people of all ages. One need not wait till the age of retirement to have one's health care rationed. The economy and people's fear of bills that they cannot pay is rationing health care right now.

By the way, how many people without insurance do you think your local hospital can treat and still keep their doors open? They don't get their medical supplies and pharmaceuticals free. Doctors and nurses don't get their education free and like the rest of us have education loans that they are expected to pay back, mortgages, and monthly bills.

And last but not least. Republicans and their philosophy of unrestrained capitalism have finally succeeded in making what they call socialism look good.

Bill Moyers should have called his program an infomercial for Single payer health care. There was no sense of debate. It sounded scripted and I wondered where the teleprompters were hidden. Furthermore, the "facts" that were bandied about were either lies or slanted. It was a slick piece of media with the aim of convincing someone who has not looked into the issue - completely looked on both sides - to jump on the bandwagon.

I also wondered how much George Soros had contributed - either directly or indirectly - to the performance. Bill did the same type of "program" with the McCain Feingold bill - but forgot to tell the audience that the speakers were all under the same Soros umbrella.

I liked how Dr. H skirted the issue of the need for rationing in the future. Also, 16,000 physicians are not a groundswell. Plus, they all forgot to mention Tom Daschle's comment about Americans need to realize that they will die and cannot expect services which will extend their life 5 years because the money will go to younger citizens. Plus, Mr. Soros has pushed for the right to assisted suicide for those in health problems. That will save loads of money.

No one mentioned the extensive Canadian Health Care Study Report - done by the country itself. I am not surprised because it paints a dire picture that I doubt many Americans would like. It takes months to get procedures which we get in weeks. You can google Canadian Health Care Study and find the report. It is long but well worth reading.

I was moved by Donna's comments but surely she knows that if she had been living in Canada, she'd be dead by now. She was lucky to be living in here. I have friends from Canada and they think our insurance is best. Many of them try to come to the states for care that they cannot get at home. They say that the young kids don't worry because they are healthy and don't need the services that we over 60 need.

I think a country that will ration health care to its citizens over 60 - and it will be even worse than now with Medicare and Medicaid - is immoral. My parents are 90 and 92. I've been so happy to know that I have strong genes. Now I am not so sure. I will not be able to get the services that they have received. That would make them a drag to the single payer system.

Mr. Moyers should just change the title of his show to Bill Moyers Socialistic One World Vision. I thought the comparison of Single Payer to using a town library to be so insulting. The fire department as well. The difference in cost is so staggering that it is ridiculous that the comparison was made.

Massachusetts is struggling. I know.

It is blatantly incorrect to say 50% of bankruptcies are due to insurance. Also, it is against the law for any hospital to turn away a patient because he cannot pay. "industrialized" countries and it will not happen here in out future if this travesty called single payer comes true.

Mr. Moyers created the need for McCain Feingold using his position on PBS. He tried to do the same with this issue. I swear that the taping took place after hours of rehearsal and a good meal with lots of wine. They were positively giddy. Or, perhaps they were just high on the idea that those who watched the broadcast would be ignorant enough to believe it.

Mr. Moyers needs to admit that his show is an offshoot of the Obama, Soros connection. I also wondered how many of his "sponsors" are funded by Soros. I was told that the ACORN "mother" house is the address for at least 200 - 250 "different" groups. I don't have time to check out addresses and it wouldn't help since we all have Mailbox companies in our towns to use as addresses.

Why is the only alternative proposed by Progressives, that is Socialists - or Communists, or Fascists - that we tear people down rather than help build others up? We don't need hand outs; we need hand ups. Educate. Build self confidence and responsibility.

Remember that companies provide jobs and jobs allow us all to enjoy our lives. I don't care how much money some one makes as long as I make enough to serve my needs through my hard work.

Finally, has Mr. Moyers redistributed his wealth yet? If not, he can send me $15,000 so I can buy a few things I want. Or, he can donate it in my name to his local hospital so that they can fund a clinic. I wait for Mr. Obama to decide that all media should have a salary cap - actors, reporters - those like Mr. Moyers.

Mr. Moyers has lost his credibility to argue an issue without bias, slant, and with truth. How can we make a decision with this one sided pap?

In response to "Are there any alternative models for health care that are being left out of the discussion or that you support?" I'd like to point out a bill already before the Senate called the "Healthy Americans Act". Here are some features of this proposal:
- It's universal and compulsory coverage that's as good as members of Congress get today
- Its coverage doesn't go away, even if you change or lose your job, retire, go to school, or become too sick to work
- It's been refined and reviewed extensively since January 2007, including reviews by the Congressional Budget Office, the Joint Committee on Taxation, and the independent consulting firm Lewin Group
- Employers would no longer provide health coverage; instead they'd convert the current cost of coverage into additional salary for employees, who would use this money to buy insurance, which they would be required to have
- Getting rid of the $200 billion a year employer tax deduction would free up funds to subsidize insurance up to 400 percent of the poverty line, which is $82,000 for a family of four
- Families who have incomes under $40,000 a year will have less out-of-pocket expenses than they do today
- Families between $40,000 and $50,000 would pay about $7 a month more
- Families between $50,000 and $150,000 would pay about $28 a month more
- In return for these increases, families get guaranteed coverage that they would never lose for any reason, coverage that would be more comprehensive and include prevention benefits
- Over a dozen Senators from both parties co-sponsored it, including senators such as Lindsey Graham, Joe Lieberman, Arlen Specter, Lamar Alexander, Mary Landrieu, and Bill Nelson

.

Thank you for providing this forum for discussions. I had posted this earlier in the thread and have noticed that no one has commented on the questions I brought up, so here is the post once more. Mainly for those who didn't see my original post.

I am 62 years old. My wife of 40 years is 58. We still continue to be able to afford private coverage. We are both very active and in good health. We both continue to be employed.

Can someone tell all of us what the combined CEO's and fat cats and various board of directors salaries and advertising and marketing budgets are of the top 10 publicly-traded health insurance corporations?

Then to add to that, what's the stock market investors cut of the action?

Plus don't overlook this. What is the amount for the lobbying and legal expenses for those lobbyists in both Washington DC and every state in the Union?

Oh, and then there are the expenses paid out for the various associations who run copious amounts of bat-crazy spin-and-spew fact twisting BS through the myriad of print, TV and internet news outlets throughout the country.

What's all the above add up to?

And here is an eye-opening stat from Health Care for America Now:

Profits of the 10 largest publicly traded insurers increased 428 percent from 2000 to 2007, from $2.4 billion to $12.9 billion.

Has your wage or salary gone up 428 percent?

Now let's get serious, how much does all of that truly benefit the doctor/patient relationship?

On an end note: Our family of three has had the fortunate opportunity to have had health care coverage continuously with the same system since 1982. Over that 27 year period our total outlay for the premiums has been $175,500. Presently our coverage costs $725 per month for only the two of us now. Thanks to our genetics, our lifestyle of healthy living practices, preventative care, and our fortunate situation of no catastrophic hospitalizations -- over that same period of time our total doctor and medical bills, including co-payments have added up to a yearly average of $859.72. That's a grand total of $23,212.50 over the 27 years. I wonder if there's any chance of getting a rebate on what we've saved the system?

And just imagine the hundreds of thousands, no make that millions of people who haven't been as fortunate in that same time period.

Think about it ...

House Bill 676

Senate Bill 703

Read them ... if you haven't already done so.

Thanks again for providing this forum.

OldenGoldenDecoy

.

Personally, I can't wait until Walmart and Walgreens Drug Stores open their little clinics. Afterall, it was Walmart who came to the aid of the people in New Orleans when the government would not. Moreover, while Obama promised a lot during the election, he seems to peter out when it comes time to put the money where his mouth was. At least I'll be able to get some simple services from Walmart. I don't know what to do about the more complicated issues. I have noticed a trend, though, where such low cost clinics are being located only in very, very impoverished areas. While I don't live in an area like that, there are plenty of people here who don't have, and cannot afford, health insurance, but no one pays attention to us. I have no faith that a feasible solution will be found for the uninsured. The premiums for a government plan will probably be unreasonably high. Any talk of having a medical "savings account" is ludicrous. They assume the uninsured have much higher incomes than they do. The people in the government aren't in touch with average people.

IT’S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE WAY THE MEDICAL PROVIDERS CALCULATE THE BILL FOR THE UNINSURED. THIS IS OBSCENE, BUT NO ONE SEEMS TO BE AWARE OF THIS.

Whenever people complain about the rising cost of health care, they are usually talking about the rising cost of the insurance premiums that are deducted from the paychecks of employees who have health care benefits. It seems that some people are having a difficult time paying the $30 - 50 dollar increase in their monthly premium. This is a problem the uninsured would like to have.

It seems that no one knows about the payment formula that the insurance companies force on the medical industry, or how it is applied to the uninsured.

Most of the major insurance companies have a contract with the medical providers (doctors, labs, and hospitals) to give them a reduced price for their services, which is typically about 65% of the ‘base’ price that is charged only to uninsured patients. Their contracts further stipulate that the insurance companies have to pay only 50% of the base price for the first charge on a given day, and 25% of the base price for the remaining charges for the same day, less the patient’s copay. This means that the insurance companies pay only 16 – 33 % of the base price less the patient’s copay. Thus, you can generally say they pay about 25% of the base price for any medical bill they get. This also means that whenever the doctors and hospitals want to raise their price to the insurance companies by $1, they have to raise the base price to the uninsured by $4.

This formula is commonly used by most of the major insurance companies.

To illustrate:

If a medical procedure "costs" $1200, the insurance company is only asked to pay $300 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $1200.

If a medical procedure "costs" $12,000, the insurance company is only asked to pay $3,000 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $12,000.

If a medical procedure "costs" $120,000, the insurance company is only asked to pay $30,000 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $120,000.

If a medical procedure "costs" $400,000, the insurance company is only asked to pay $100,000 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $400,000. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT THE INSURANCE COMPANY IS BILLED AND WHAT THE UNINSURED PATIENT IS BILLED IN THIS EXAMPLE IS $300,000!!! This happens every day. I've seen these bills myself.

It is my understanding that the actual cost of a medical procedure is closer to what the insurance companies pay, or 25% of the billed fee. The 75% “penalty” is what the uninsured get charged because they don't have insurance.

The most upsetting thing about rising health care costs is not that the insured patient’s deductible is rising, but that their insurance companies have forced the medical providers to charge the uninsured four times (400%) of what they, the multibillion dollar insurance companies, pay, on average. To make this possible, they have put forth the view that people who don’t have insurance are lazy, unskilled, stupid, or unwilling to contribute to an insurance plan. However, most of the uninsured are working, but their employers will not provide insurance. While they are busy convincing the public that the attitude of the uninsured is the problem, they have neglected to show the truth about what they are charging to private individuals for insurance. Their private insurance plans cost about $700 to $2,000 per month, while the typical uninsured worker earns only $1,200 to $2,400 per month before taxes. It’s very difficult, if not nearly impossible, to pay for food, housing, transportation, etc. with these wages, long before health care costs are added.

If you assume the average person who gets insurance at work pays a monthly premium of $100 per month, that means they pay about $1,200 per year in premiums. Further, if you assume they pay about $50 per month in copays, it means they pay about $600 per year out of pocket for medical expenses. Thus, the average person that gets insurance at work contributes about $1,800 per year for health care out of their own money. Most of their health care is paid for by their employer, and is untaxable. Compare this to the uninsured individual, who earns less, and is forced to pay an extra $1,800 just for one diagnostic test as “penalty”, and is in no position to get follow-up testing, doctor supervised care, or any treatment. There is simply no reason for the uninsured to even go to a doctor because they can’t afford to find out what is actually wrong or get the subsequent treatment.

The majority of people who have health care provided by their employer would not be able to purchase health care if their employer stopped providing it. They are not "better" people than the uninsured. Where I live, jobs that pay $20,000 to $30,000 (with a growing number who have no medical insurance) per year are the norm, but the media gives you the impression that there are a lot of people who make much higher salaries, $50,000 - $100,000. Only those employed in the medical industry get the higher wages. There are very few people who can afford to purchase health care insurance without a subsidy from their employer; there are very few people who can afford to pay the grotesquely inflated medical expenses that are 400% higher than what the insurance companies pay. There is a war being waged by the medical industry against the uninsured. Any contact with a hospital will ruin their lives and destroy their families – bankruptcy, foreclosure, homelessness – it is virtually inevitable. The health care providers don’t care. They feel it’s their duty to charge these grotesque fees to the uninsured.

Some people seem to believe that it is our fault we don’t have insurance because we don’t work for an employer who provides insurance, and we don’t purchase it. First, there are very few jobs offering insurance today. The people who have insurance from their employers got it years ago in most cases. The jobs with insurance are few and far between. The insurance offered today, is unaffordable to the people who can’t get it at work. The jobs without insurance pay much less than the jobs that offer insurance. It’s like getting hit from both sides – lower salaries and no benefits. Then, the biggest insult is that we get charged 4 times what the people with benefits and higher salaries when we seek medical care. It’s unbelievable what poor math skills the people in the medical industry have when they decide who can afford to pay the most for the same treatment. It’s also ironic that the “caring” profession is so cruel and inhumane toward people who can’t find a job with insurance. Personally, I tried to purchase an inexpensive health insurance plan. They charge me $100 per month, the same amount as the premium for those who get insurance from their employer, except my employer doesn’t contribute a dime. They won’t pay for much of anything. My annual limit on benefits is the amount I pay for my premiums, which is $1,200. Unfortunately, I had to go to the emergency room and they wouldn’t pay any of it. My visits to the doctor’s office were excluded through numerous deductibles and copays. They only real benefit I get is that some doctors will reduce their price to people on that plan. Essentially, the insurance company keeps what I pay to them, and some doctors will reduce my bill, but no tests or emergency care. It’s a joke. If the doctors would just give me the reduced rate without using the insurance plan instead of charging me 4 times the actual cost, I would be able to use the money I now pay for premiums to the cut rate insurance company to pay the doctor’s bill.

A government health care plan will work best if the private insurance companies are not allowed to participate. The private companies are adept at luring individuals to purchase insurance from them and then forcing out the sick ones. If the private insurance companies are allowed to remain in the pool with a government insurance plan, they will cherry pick the healthy people, keeping their premiums and profits for themselves. This will leave all the costs for treating the sick people, which are normally paid for with premiums from the healthy people, to the government insurance plan and the tax payers. Without premiums from the healthy people, a government/ tax payer paid plan will be extremely expensive and probably financially out of reach for most of the uninsured.

jscottu post:
"Most of the people posting on this site should be ashamed of themselves."
"But don't try to pervert the law into giving you something that the law doesn't possess."

The laws have been created and approved by an "OLIGARCHY" for self enrichment!
All the laws that are in effect, were not and have not been approved by the people at the ballot.

Millions of people paid taxes that was used for someone else health insurance while
"50 millions do not have insurance" though they have paid taxes!
"WASHINGTON - Twelve-year-old Deamonte Driver died of a toothache Sunday.
A routine, $80 tooth extraction might have saved him. If his mother had been insured."
You state, "If you want health care...PAY FOR IT. Or WORK FOR IT."
Where would the 12 year old go to work, "to PAY FOR IT"? With an unemployment
at 10%, that is, over 30 million people in the nation are unemployed, not to mention
many millions work at minimum wages.
Three trillions dollars were used to bail the Banks - the corrupt
institution that were on rampage at the expense of the public, that has to
pay that debt. Debt that resulted of "dysfunctional government".
It appears that you do not have a clear view of the problem that lies ahead!

it's frustrating to have heard so much good info on benefits of single payer on your program and then to have a poll which doesn't give single payer as a preference.

how would you know i favor single payer if i vote no on obama's half baked proposal?

there will doubtless be problems with single payer as there are with medicare, but at least everyone will be in it together and can lobby more effectively than they can with corrupt greedy insurance companies who make money by not providing health care.

Dang, this is a huge blog, I can't seem to find its bottom. However, Gordo's chief blunder is that he derails at the very start of his argument:

>It might be a good idea to look at the government’s track record in running economic enterprises. It is terrible...

Whether his critique is more-of-the-same skullduggery or sincere, albeit misinformed, skepticism is not known. Be that as it may, the ideal solution is cited on Moyers' very blog here. From the TV segment, Donna Smith sez:

>It’s a great idea from the left, which is public financing , combined with a great idea from the right, which is private delivery.

Once we can clear the air of THIS smokescreen -- along with the onus of the appellation "socialized" -- we OUGHT to be in the clear for swaying a huge groundswell of citizenry to the single-payer paradigm.

I was dismayed that the single payer idea is not even being seriously debated in Congress. What can I do and where can I go to give our congressional leaders the courage to seriously consider this proposal.

What a load of BS from J.S. Gordon of the WALL STREET JOURNAL. He obviously didn't watch the program. If the profit motive keeps corporations lean,customer oriented, etc., why are we baling them out with trillions? Why do they have non-medical clerks deciding who doesn't get care? etc. etc.
Les Walker

Excellent observations, Mr. Murray. About time somebody said it.

If single payer (socialized funding) is good enough for the police, the fire department, the army, air force, marines, navy, and coast guard, why isn’t it good enough for medicine? Why this crazy aversion to the term, “socialized”? It seems most Americans are proud of all the previous branches and don’t go around calling them communists even though we communally fund them. Something has crept into our national psyche and made us crazy.
Okay, crazier than usual.

I believe the undesirable social circumstances we encounter today are relative to loss of American identity; to a loss of respect for personal worth; by congressional leaders;-- and after God was removed from social affairs,--by constituents as well. It almost seems overlooked that the 'difference' in western civilization--is that all progressive changes flowed out from the heart of the people;--that this 'heart' is described in words as--equality--talent--truth--freedom--compassion--justice--; American success flowed from personal character strengths,--surrounded personal convictions and perseverence,--words as devotion, honor, divine inspiration'. Over the past 50 years, we have moved from reliance on individual ingenuity--and the community diversity and prosperity that flowed from these free agents;--to a state of dependency on some central corporate authority. It seems 'outside-in' direction has always been the human inhibitor. A return to compliance with the "Laws of Nature and Nature's God" seems the need; and as these can't be defined, but are written in our hearts; to free the person to be the 'best he/she could be' may well have been the secret to American success;--if so, the only resolution to the dilemma of the injustice relative to medical care would be to free the profession from the world of 'buying and selling',--and return it to the 'heart' of the physicians,--through a National Health Care system based on recognition of our 'humanity',--the enigmatic IDEALS our constitution seems arranged to defend. I think we have reached a stage in likeness to the precedent to the fall of Rome,--where social reward flows with those who express mastery of the knowledge,-and allegiance to the rules of a current era;--a collective mind of mankind, which although expanded,-- remains inaccurate, incompatible--and most likely projects an image of reality that still is not 'real',--will fade as did theirs. That a primary component in the collective mentality of western civilization was to seek personal guidance from a God of Love; was a precedent to progress; should deserve further consideration; perhaps what we can't define; can't fit into our reality founded on the appearance of physical objects; is in fact what is REAL!

Filmmaker Michael Moore did a great documentary on this issue a few years ago, titled "Sicko." It is time we take out the DVD (if we already have it, or if not, buy a copy) and play it again.

The mysterious Obama plan is not defined yet. And it needs the approval by the medical industrial complex who is the only one at the table with their cronies in Congress. They want to kill any so called "public option" absolutely, or practically by all means to protect its ability to continue profiting from our pain and suffering...

There should not be any illusion of a healthcare reform without a complete Single Payer system, one well tested in all other countries, as the program by Moyers attest to. Watch the PBS Frontline program "Sick Around the World" by click the name link below.

Unfortunately, those making decisions not only have their premium health insurance, they are also paid by the industry to deny the same for the majority of Americans.

Healthcare is a right and healthcare is a public service, not cash cow for special interests.
Think and act - it is only upto us all again to make real change in 2009.

My understanding of the Obama Plan for Health-care is to create a government function to be ‘insurer of last resort’ and to enable it to compete with existing private plans. Over time, it could be expected that, with it’s enormous leverage and competitive advantage(e.g Medicare), the public plan could / would evolve into the final ‘single-payer.’

So, isn’t the Obama plan simply a more pragmatic means to that single-payer end?

I think the only one posting on this page who should be ashamed of themselves is you, jscottu. Bastiat was a fool. It's true our government doesn't work right, but it isn't the concept of goverment thats at fault, it's your wonderful private sector. They're the ones bribing the weak-willed senators and congressmen into helping them drive costs up. The healthcare industry is extortion, plain and simple. American capitalism amounts to little more than sugar-coated piracy. At least our elected officials can be held accountable to some extent by losing elections. Unregulated business is like giving the keys to the bank vault to Black Beard and trusting in his honesty. How stupid is that??? I also find it funny that a guy who, in the same post, comments on job loss and then turns around and tells people to WORK & PAY for their over-priced healthcare. You can't work and pay for something with no job, buster. As to the absolutely ridiculous view of the Libertarians about paying medical costs out-of-pocket, no one shy of a tycoon could pay out-of-pocket for healthcare in this pirate nation. Its the neo-con posters on this blog who need to do the growing up. Utter anal- retentive selfishness is a trait passed by most people once they get past preschool.

In reply to the absurd post about "single payer food": Food is a predictable expense, unlike the medical bills arising from a health crisis which can bankrupt even an employed, insured person in short order. Nevertheless, the government does have a taxpayer-funded social program to help the neediest among us purchase food: Food Stamps.

Five (5) Essentials to fixing the US health-care system:

1) Get politics (and Congress) out of the new system's implementation - ala Mr. Daschle's "Med Fed" suggestion.

Until we have universal publicly-funded federal elections, members of Congress will continue to "dance with those that brung them".

2) Employ and adequately empower the most capable, fully independent forensic accountancy services available.

Until we KNOW exactly why medical costs have risen at MULTIPLES of underlying inflation for a generation, any attempt to manage them is a fool's errand.

3) Comprehensive outreach to solicit critiques and suggestions from our medical complex's front-line folks: uninsured, under-insured, and marginally- insured patients, nurses, physician's assistants, pharmacists, clerks, custodians and secretaries.

Provide clear, bullet-proof whistle-blower protection (and meaningful incentives) in the process of identifying existing and prospective waste, fraud and abuse.

4) Examine and challenge the underlying rationale for numerous (some rather bizarre) underlying assumptions/policies inherent in our existing health system.*

5) Revoke the corporate charters of financial intermediaries which have failed their original purpose. Health maintenance organizations have long argued that by consolidating and streamlining the provision of health care - with a critical focus on effective prevention - they could provide health care most efficiently.

Put quite simply, have they? **
-------------
* Some existing underlying policies/assumptions:

- Having the government (read: taxpayers) reimburse medical universities for limiting enrollment in physician training programs

- That a tort system which either allows egregious claims or protects incompetence actually serves our society or the cause of justice.

- Because of their commitment and the high cost of their education and training, physicians are entitled to a gross ANNUAL income nearly equaling the ENTIRETY of that educational expense.

- Drug companies are entitled to high profits and preferential patent protection - while the government (read: taxpayers) provides much of the underlying basic research for free.

- While most hospitals are cost-plus "cash cows", many maintain their non-profit status through a seemingly limitless array of financial legerdemain.
-----------
** Will HMO/PPO & other for-profit providers be required to pay back the billions in public monies to be invested in developing digital medical record-keeping?

Or will this become yet another taxpayer "give-away" to one of the financially fattest and most profitable corporate industries?

As I sat through the show listening to everybody debate the issue on healthcare reform I was really inspired to see all the nurses and doctors out on the streets protesting for healtvare reform. In sight of that it is a realization that something in our country needs to be done and soon cause this issue effects everybody. Like me I am laid off and have no healtcare for my family (wife and daughter). But I only saw one problem with everything that everybody was proposing and that was they keep turning to a government to help fix our problems for us even when through out history the govenrment has been on the side of big insurance and pharmacutical companys. So I would think the results in time would revile the truth about them and where their hearts really lay and that is with money. So why would we keep turning to this body to fix our problems when every time they say yes they will do something and when it is done it ussually cost us more out of pocket then anything. So what I would propose instead of having them vote and fix problems for us all the docters and nurses that care about healtcare reform why dont we as people of the USA pull our money together and start our own universal heathcare plan where oh ever signed up just payed a tax and it went to a body or organization thats ran by docters so that they could pay the bills. No there would be alot of kinks that needed worked out because of money damn near every problem would be evolved around money but I know there is more than enough people in this counrty that could pull together more than enough money to get it started and sastain it but the problem is people would have to sacrfice their lifestyles for such a huge plan. And that would by the biggest problem is that we are not willing in this counrty to sacrfice our way of living for the better of all so what do we do turn to a corrupt government and demand things but dont want to pay for them. Then we demand so much that they seem to listen so when they start to listen we a the people back off and just trust them. Then they do their proposales and we say it sounds good they pass then when or co-pays go up we just take it and say nothing because guess what we still have our little lifestyle so to make up for it to keep our lifes the same we just go to the docters less and less to try to make up for the rising cost of healthcare. Its a big cycle of bs and we the people need to break it not turn to a body the has proven over the years to do more damage then good. But if we could come to the reality that we live outside of our means here in this counrty, pull our money together and started our own universal heathcare plan that could compete with the private insurance companys that would be the best thing to do. Plus its vwery simple to understand if we put our healthcare in the hands of the government to pay for healthcare it would be very bad 2 generation down the line because no matter witch way you look at it the government is in huge debt to the FED Resreve and guess what the reserve loves the big insurance and pill company because they help the FED keep us in perpatual debt to them through government so turning our helthcare over to the government will be turning it over to the FED and their beliefs. Just look at it like this we turn it over to government they do a good job running healthcare we all love it and get it for a small tax but to pay for the difference they would take out loans from the FED to pay for it then 15 years later the FED calls in the debts of the people kinda like they helped the banks implod or economy now, then what our grandchildren will just have to suffer cause our wrong doings, because we didnt wanna suffer now and give up our mansions and yaths and jets and stuff like that. But if we would just give some of our materalistic things that mean nothing at the end of life so that we could pull our money together and creat a system from the people for the people that wouldnt give any dictarol power to any form of government over our healthcare but we the people would have the power to provide people with proper healthcare that we all want and desrve.

C.K. Emmons writes:
"I am dismayed that the failing Massachusetts health care experiment is being seriously considered as a model for the nation."

No surprise: it's the Chicago Way, Deval Patrick having been Axelrod-Kerry's mob-friendly prototype for "Obaama".

There seems to be no remedy -- now that Baucus et al. have turned off the Congressional fax machines, to stop the tide of single-payer demands -- but to GO to DC and over-turn the rotten-apple cart.

Dr. Newhall at health-justice.org is gearing up for 25 June.

Get there: it'll be great -- our very own Tiananmen Square, perhaps ...

Most of the people posting on this site should be ashamed of themselves. Your children can't find jobs because the government has messed up the economy. But you want the government to give you something for nothing (healthcare). Yes, I know what you will say (you will be paying "insurance premiums"). But the adults among us know that it will end up just like Medicare...decisions made by bureaucrats and the whole system going broke. If you want health care...PAY FOR IT. Or WORK FOR IT. Or ask for charitable help. But don't try to pervert the law into giving you something that the law doesn't possess. Frederic Bastiat destroyed your big government arguments way back in 1850 in his book "The Law"...you can read it free online.

Note previous post by Katherine Benziger: The leadership of moveon.org has chosen NOT to support single-payer. If you, like me, have been a member of this organization and disagree with their decision, let them know. If enough of us let this ostensibly "grassroots organization" know what we think, maybe they'll reconsider.

Of reading some folks concerns about just "one side of the argument", I believe that is exactly what has occured in the healthcare debate in the senate and of course the Obama healthcare summits. Single payer was excluded and in some cases, its backers led away by cops.

Much of the media has taken the lead from the fearless leaders and not explained the dynamics of single payer type programs.

Bill Moyers did a good job of going over the single payer option in the short segment. I believe that was the purpose of the segment, not a full blown healthcare discussion.

No health care plan will really work as long as profits are put ahead of well-being. I find it odd though that the very people who need help with this issue...including myself...are the backbone of this country. We are the very people whose taxes are used to provide coverage to everyone but ourselves. What would happen if we all just woke up and said enough? Demand that every member of congress pay their own insurance. We have become too complacent with our society.

This show emphasizes why these debates need to have representatives from both sides; FOX doesn't claim to be unbiased but then it's not on a government subsidy.

Without hearing both sides ( and reading from the National Review is Not my definition of fair representation ) the invited guests get a chance to make statements unchallenged ( e.g. that nationalized health care has in any way worked in other countries - Canada has long waits and a healthier population to start with; UK is a disaster both in terms of finances and outcomes ). Many other countries in the world have systems that walk people to their graves.

Now let me cover a few points that were briefly mentioned :

1) certain states (MA springs to mind) tried some form of socialized medicine. It rapidly proved too expensive i.e. costs rose in the covered group. Outcomes were not any better.

If something fails in the lab, should you ramp it up ? ( in a sense, policy decision makers need themselves to adopt the type of clinical trial mindset they impose on industry )

2) The government is not about asking, it is about telling, so the coercion issue ( nonchalantly dismissed by Bill's guests ) is still in play. Most of these socialized medicine plans substitute one segment of the health care industry ( the insurance industry ) leaving the throbbing cost centers of the other segments untouched. ( do you believe that the for-profit insurance industry has missed the opportunity to squeeze doctors or hospitals or do you think it is not allowed ? )

The coercion comes in to play not when you choose a doctor but when you choose an insurance company. After socialized medicine there will be no more competition in the (government controlled ) socialized insurance industry.

Some insurance plans are better than others. By tying medicine to the government you are tying your health fate to the government's budgetary constraints ( which in the era of trillion $$ deficits is something to consider ) - expect to see more innovative treatments become "elective" or "experimental"

Besides which this does not address the original problem which was cost containment, not extension of benefits to the uninsured i.e. this whole health care debate started not because people worried about the uninsured but because costs were running out of control (12%-16% increases year on year ). The drivers of these costs ( aging population, new treatments & devices, better outcomes which result in people getting sick from something else later on ) are still there. Putting the whole thing on the government's books does not alter these costs ( has the government shown itself to be better at cost containment than the private system e.g. in the states that did have partially socialized medicine ? )

Also, the problem of the uninsured arose in part because small companies experienced large cost increases in their insurance bill and decided to drop coverage. Socialized medicine does nothing to change that; it merely ads a payroll tax to force companies to buy the government insurance.

Now all this would be Ok if the government were willing to set up an insurance company that COMPETES ( on even ground ) with private insurance. If its costs are so low, it should have no problem doing so.

( and btw, if marketing + profit costs are so much higher than government inefficiency, why don't we socialize any other industry ? - the truth is that over time, government costs tend to grow, whereas industry must compete and must offer consumers a good value. With a government monopoly, you have no chance to opt out. )

Our social safety net is torn,
because in the USA we were born.

The industrialized world has medical care,
but not over here, only over there.

Our medical coverage is poor,
and the insurance predator is at the door.

Our nest egg and healthcare are broken,
but Max Baucus and the lobbyists have spoken.

Our government says their help we don’t need,
Will they know when we bleed if we plead and we plead?

But the C.E.O.’s will sleep tight tonight,
because they got the TARP and don’t share our plight.

They can’t understand - why all the fuss,
If their security blanket suffocates the rest of us.

.

Thank you for providing this forum for discussions.

I am 62 years old. My wife of 40 years is 58. We still continue to be able to afford private coverage. We are both very active and in good health. We both continue to be employed.

Can someone tell all of us what the combined CEO's and fat cats and various board of directors salaries and advertising and marketing budgets are of the top 10 publicly-traded health insurance corporations?

Then to add to that, what's the stock investors cut of the action? Plus don't overlook adding the amount for the lobbying and legal expenses for those lobbyists in both Washington DC and every state in the Union. Oh, and then there are the expenses paid out for the various associations who run copious amounts of bat-crazy spin-and-spew fact twisting BS through the myriad of print, TV and internet news outlets throughout the country.

And here is an eye-opening stat from Health Care for America Now:

Profits of the 10 largest publicly traded insurers increased 428 percent from 2000 to 2007, from $2.4 billion to $12.9 billion.

Have your wages or salary gone up 428 percent?

Now let's get serious here, how much does all of that truly benefit the doctor/patient relationship?

On an end note: Our family of three has had the fortunate opportunity to have had health care coverage continuously with the same system since 1982. Over that 27 year period our total outlay for the premiums has been $175,500. Presently our coverage costs $725 per month for only the two of us now. Thanks to our genetics, our lifestyle of healthy living practices, preventative care, and our fortunate situation of no catastrophic hospitalizations -- over that same period of time our total doctor and medical bills, including co-payments have added up to a yearly average of $859.72. That's a grand total of $23,212.50 over the 27 years. I wonder if there's any chance of getting a rebate on what we've saved the system?

And just imagine the hundreds of thousands, no make that millions of people who haven't been as fortunate in that same time period.

Think about it ...

Conyer's bill: HR676!

Read it ... if you haven't already done so.

Thanks again for providing this forum.

OldenGoldenDecoy

.

So glad Moyers elicits facts without agitating and interrupting just for "entertainment's sake". Thank heavens there is a news commentator who is more interested in the facts of the case than his own ego.

Single payer sounds like a great solution, except for one thing. The triumvirate concept of Rome was to prevent domination by any one of the trio. Our government (bless it) is founded on that same principle with the legislature, congress and president supporting/watching each of the others.

The triumvirate of our health system is the health insurers, medical association, and pharmaceutical industry. Each and all of those have been guilty of greed and overpricing. This isn't to say that every doctor is over-charging patients, but there are organizations and hospitals which accomplish just that. And we all know the degree to which pharmaceutical companies go to regain funds for their R & D.

If the insurance companies are deleted, what will keep pharmaceutical and medical expenses under control? Not saying that the medical insurance watch dogs are efficient, but they do accomplish a certain amount. At times it is destructive, admittedly, but at least there is some overseeing being done.

What program is in the works which could accomplish putting a lid on the expenses of all 3?

Until that is created, how can health expenses truly be lowered to the level that the consumers and/or the government can afford it? If one is deleted, the other 2 are left without that controlling factor, and expenses are still beyond reason.

Lu Roberts

Thank you to the doctors and nurses and to Moyers for explaining so clearly the benefits of a Single-Payer health alternative.

I hope the information provided will lead to a groundswell of popular support that, in effect, will create a "people's lobby" in contradistinction to the buying of Congressional votes with insurance industry money.

Great show! I cried,I got angry, and really feel like marching in Washington. Single Payer is undoubtedly the answer, not only to save lives, make us a more humane country with a major stress removed from all of us, but will also dramatically improve American business bottom line. Not Medicare for all, like I once thought, but Single Payer Universal Health Care, with no deductible, no co-pays, no billing to individuals. Thank you, Bill Moyers. Thank you all doctors and nurses.

If jscottu likes competing so much, why not dump him and all his neo-con ilk off in the jungle, or the arctic somewhere and let them slug it out with the wild animals (and each other) and see how quickly they change their minds. None of them would last a week. Competition IS the problem. Cooperation is a much better plan. Single payer all the way, mister.

Thank you Mr. Moyers for presenting a point of view that supports the provider rather than the insurance industry. Discussions of the healthcare crisis rarely include opinions from the most important component of the healthcare system; doctors and healthcare providers. The public assumes that doctor's high fees are the problem. This is really only a diversion from the real issue delaying reform. That issue being insurance company profiteering from denial-of-care. Over the last decade physicians have watched the managed care system destroy doctor-patient relationships, through restricted networks and massive paperwork burdens to deny coverage. This forces doctors into hiring more staff to reprocess denied claims even though we collect smaller and smaller fees. Doctors have lost the ability to think about a complicated diagnosis or long-term outcome. Instead they push a drug consumption agenda and compound problems with off-legend drug prescribing and uncontrolled polypharmacy. Consequently, adverse drug reactions are the 4th leading cause of death in America. Why is this tolerated?

If we abolish the multiple fee schedule system currently used by insurance companies to burden and undervalue healthcare delivery, billions of dollars will be saved. There are two ways to accomplish this; the first would be establishing set fees for all procedures. The alternative method would be the elimination of the Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) system owned by the AMA. This is the coding system used by doctors to bill insurance companies. Instead the doctor would be paid on a time-based system regardless of the procedure. This type of system would encourage the best practice outcomes rather than promote cost shifting to high dollar procedures.

Doctors demonstrating the best results should be rewarded and these successful treatment paradigms should be replicated throughout America without interruption or interference, whether from insurance company adjusters, drug companies or other special interest groups.

We need to force insurance companies to pay a reasonable, livable hourly-wage for physicians! This will improve the quality of health care and stop the ruthlessness required to be in business as a doctor today. I realize there are many diagnostic and operative procedures that are overpriced; this will take considerable negotiation with hospitals and doctors to reduce costs associated with advanced technologies. However, I think doctors will be happy if they have a guaranteed reimbursement for services and bonus system rather than the chaotic reimbursement system run by insurance company profiteers.

Thank you for your dedication to healthcare in America.
Dr. Jerome True

I counted around 400 comments so far, of which over 90% were favorable to single-payer, many passionately so. If each person who made those comments sent a copy to 10 friends today, and half of them sent to 10 friends tomorrow, and so forth, in twelve days we could tell the entire adult population of the US about single-payer!

I love this show and this program was great. Thank you for informing the viewers that Canada has a good single payer health care system.

Your guests are right- as a Canadian, if they were to revoke it, I would join the revolution! Not only can we choose our doctors and hospitals and specialists, we have preventative medicine. Once a year I automatically get a mammogram screening (my mother and grandmother both had and died of breast cancer). In addition, my husband is on a list to get a colonoscopy every five years due his family history.

I can't believe that a country with the wealth of the US, allows its citizen's to go bankrupt in order to get the health care they need. It would seem to me that greed has taken over your country not only on Wall St., but also on Main St.

If having single payer health insurance in my country is viewed as socialist by the conservative right in the U.S., call me a socialist. I live in a civilized country which lives the words "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". For a country like the U.S. whose citizens profess to be the most Christian in the world, I find it hypocritical that their actions don't reinforce this.

I agree with the poster that we need publicly funded elections. In the meantime, though, Americans need to focus their energy in a massive single issue demonstration throughout the nation -- on single payer. Our sold-out leadership has defeated the hopes and energy of a country that wants single payer in mass numbers, but individually, each person does not believe enough in their own heart that they can make a difference in a system that is owned by the blood-sucking health insurance and pharmaceutical industries -- without American voices joined up LOUD in unison.

Single payer has to be insisted on now. The US has the huge advantage of having the medical profession on the side of single payer – and how splendid to have such analytical, articulate and dedicated spokespeople and Drs. Himmelstein and Wolfe and Donna Smith. Now we need the 60+ percent of the rest of us to take to the internet, the phones and the streets.

Long ago -- in 1963 -- at the London School of Economics, I was fortunate enough to be taught by Richard Titmuss, leading architect of the British National Health System. The major obstacle faced by Health Minister Aneurin Bevan was the medical profession. Titmuss studied private, pre-insurance industry, health delivery in the US in depth and peppered his lectures with breathtaking examples of money-making abuse, including unnecessary treatments in wealthy areas, ghost surgeries and severe shortages of doctors and hospitals in poorer parts of the country. We could hardly believe what we were hearing but we understood that these were precisely the abuses that had occurred in Britain and led to passage of the NHS in 1946.

Sadly, unlike Britain, the US, replaced one abusive system of private delivery with another. Unfortunately, Britain nationalized service provision as well as financing. I believe the lesson is that there is no alternative to public financing of private health services – Canada got it right.

We need very loudly to remind President Obama that during one of the debates, he firmly said “Health care is a right.” That was the message that Titmuss delivered to us students so powerfully fifty years ago. Indeed, seventy years ago it was the conviction of Nye Bevan, who later wrote in In Place of Fear : “ … [N]o society can legitimately call itself civilised if a sick person is denied medical aid because of lack of means.”

The following excerpt from a previous post on May 24 is an argument against private health insurance companies not against the government:
"I paid through the nose when I went to the ER with heart symptoms..I forgot to call the crooks at Blue Cross and ask their permission."

Let's dump the BCBS "crooks."

Thank you Bill Moyers for one of the best Journal's ever. The single- payer discussion brought home very forcefully to me that while we live in a democracy because we get a vote, our influence stops there. Until our political campaigns receive public financing the voice of the people stops at election. From then on our representatives are owned by special interests: health care, insurance, finance, milatary, pharmaceutical, and the rest. To survive they must become pawns of powerful lobyists and we become dust in the wind. How sad for our children and those who will inherit our broken system.

Unbelievable. After more than 40 years of lies about how great Medicare is, the left wants to throw Medicare under the bus to go all the way to a single payer (government payer) system. The same garbage about "how great the Canadian system is" (it isn't). All you have to ask yourself is the question "is Obama's new plan going to be voluntary or mandatory". We both know the answer to that. If it is mandatory, it is inefficient and goes against the American ideal of liberty and small government. As for the 2 doctors being interviewed, what profession WOULDN'T want the government giving them money so they don't have to compete for a living.

I have Medicare. I have almost unlimited choice of provider and it has helped me enormously not to be limited by a list of providers or by a geographical area. Even though my former HMO allowed me to go to a well known teaching hospital, they missed my thyroid cancer and never had a physical therapist who could help me instead of making me worse. When I got Medicare all that changed for the better with fewer hassles, without costing the system more. Actually prompt and effective treatment saved the system money. Yeah for single payer.
By the way I can think of several ways to save Medicare money and make the patient paperwork still easier without cutting the doctors' fees, but that is another message. One suggestion: read articles and books by Relman.

Single payer sounds like a plan to me. I've heard as many pros as I have cons from foreign expatriots who either praise, or balk at the current U.S. system. The long waits and poor care arguement doesn't seem to hold water. Plus, in regard to the forieigners who praise our 'wonderful' system, I'd say they probably came here with profiteering as their goal, so it's little wonder they'd praise parasitical capitalism. As to that silly 'love it or leave it' mantra of the Nazi-esque neo-cons, a lot of us would leave if we had the money to do so. Yeah, even leaving the good ol' USA costs money. Also, one of the virtues of freedom is the ability to change something if you don't like it. Neo-cons are always spouting off about freedom, but don't seem to understand it very well. Freedom may not be free, but freedom with consequences isn't real freedom. They had that kind of freedom in Iraq under Saddam. Obama is a spineless puke, but McCain would have been even worse, so, as usual, we are left with the lesser of two evils. I doubt anything will change in America without a massive public uprising of late 60s magnitude.

Vince

I am dismayed that the failing Massachusetts health care experiment is being seriously considered as a model for the nation. Since the Buckley vs. Valeo Supreme Court decision declared that "money is speech", couldn't mandates to purchase health insurance from for-profit private insurance companies be considered a violation of free speech rights? A significant proportion of the money that is paid in premiums is then taken and used for campaign contributions, lobbying, and the hiring of former government employees as lobbyists (all in the name of free speech). However, free speech includes more than one component. It involves the right to say what you want to say, but it also involves the right not to be forced to say what you don't want to say. How can the government have it all 3 ways? Our Constitution guarantees the right to free speech, Buckley vs. Valeo declares that "money is speech", and citizens are being forced to participate in the "free speech" of health insurance companies by paying money that is then used to say things that they personally disagree with. How can this be legal? Seventy-three percent of Massachusetts residents (overall), from the districts where the referendum was on the ballot, voted for single-payer and against mandated private insurance last fall. Shouldn't the ACLU be challenging private insurance mandates in court on the basis that they violate free speech rights? Couldn't Massachusetts residents file a class action lawsuit? If insurance mandates are to be legal, technically, shouldn't Buckley vs. Valeo have to be overturned first, so that persons who are forced to buy health insurance couldn't argue that their free speech rights are being violated through the use of their money?

Having just watched the program, I'm heartened by the powerful, rational arguments made in support of a single-payer healthcare system that would ensure universal healthcare, and take the burden from employers of having to buy insurance for their employees - an insane system in the best of economic times. In the UK, some people who can afford it may also buy into a private insurance (BUPA) on which they can call for more rapid treatment for a non-lifethreatening condition if there is a waiting list; this could be an additional option in the USA too.

While I couldn't agree more with your two commentators, for the most part, I wish that proponents of national health insurance would remember that they need to convince the people who DON'T agree with them! All national health care systems (now including Canada) have a two tiers -- if you want to pay extra for private insurance, in order to get a few more advantages like cable TV in your hospital room or champagne after you have your baby or whatever. National insurance forces a better product from private insurers. Also, of course, as far as Harry and Louise go, basically all insured Americans are "restricted" in their choices of doctors now, since they belong to HMOs. As the doctors pointed out, the bigger the umbrella, the more choice. What I don't understand is why those Americans who've gone bankrupt from medical bills aren't out there marching with the doctors and nurses -- I'm inclined to believe that until that happens, nothing will really change.

to: Campbell Brown CNN 5-24-2009

Campbell, Great to have you back! You seem to be the only mainstream media anchor with enough spunk and fortitude to defy your network bosses on this one. Please read on:

More and more of us out here are sensing that the mainstream media is suppressing the debate on single payer healthcare. The recent Diane Rehm show Mon. 5-18-09 and last fridays Bill Moyers Journal shined a light on the malfeasance and treachery occurring in the US Senate by Senator Max Baucus with his pathetic attempt to block single payer advocates a seat at the table. 50-60% of Americans prefer single payer, yet he won't allow us in. We all know why!

Campbell, you want a mainstream coup? You have one. Go to the Bill Moyers Journal website and read the massive number of comments from viewers following his discussion on single payer. If you haven't watched the show, please do, it's chilling! The single payer tsunami is out there and Senator Baucus can't hold it back. It seems mainstream media is complicit in this obstruction, which is even more appalling for obvious reasons. It too can't stop this historical manifesto.
The medical industrial complex, through it's ads, has silenced the mainstream media and their bribes to Senator Baucus and the rest of the spineless Senate has in effect shut down our democracy!
Their day of reckoning is here! Campbell, walk with us! No bias no bull!

Sincerely, Lou Meyers

Perfect solution: all healthcare business is nonprofit. Providers still get their deserved salaries. Since R&D expenses for Pharms are covered by gov grants, no harm there. Perhaps a cap on pharm and ins ceo's would be in order.

Flat Tax??? Give the Republicans their wish as concerns this issue. Flat tax all income, no cap, to pay for Universal Health Care/Medicare for all.

>What makes John Doe next door more deserving of care than me?? Is it because he makes more money??
Exactly-- isn't that the great American dream? Make lots of money, get all the good stuff? Can't afford health care? Simple choice -- go bankrupt or die.

As a Canadian I feel so concerned for the 'average' American but I'm afraid that you have given so much power to your big corporations in insurance and big pharma that this is a mess you'll have an almost impossible time getting out of. Maybe the coming second Great Depression will be a blessing in giving you social progams the ordinary person deserves. Why should the banks and car companies be the only ones to benefit from socialism?

Hmmm… Health Care for ALL Americans is Simple!

1) MERGE Medicare with Medicaide into one single "Income Based" system for poor and elderly citizens.

2) REQUIRE insurance companies to provide the same basic coverage for ALL Non-Medicare/Medicaide citizens, regardless of health status, at affordable rates.

3) ALLOW insurance companies to "Profit" by offering additional benefits and options to those who qualify and are willing to pay the difference.

As for Funding…

1) Changing from an "Emergency Treatment" to a "Preventive Care" system will save local communities billions, maybe even trillions of taxpayer dollars!

2) Small business will be able to compete globally and hire additional taxpaying employees!

3) Wealthy seniors will pay their fair share!

4) The tremendous burden on future generations will be greatly reduced!

Bill Moyers Journal on single payer health care has given us the weapon needed to counter all the distortions and lies thrown up by those who fatten their coffers from the current system.
When viewed it will destroy all their false fear loaded ads and convert all the fence sitters that Single payer is the only true fix. If we can not believe our front line troops, the doctors and nurses then who are we to believe?
Now we must see this grand tool is viewed by all and it must be done quickly for the time is short to fire the revolt needed to bring public pressure to bear to offset that of the Insurers on those in power.

A single payer system would save on administrative costs but there was no discussion on how it would control the real drivers of increasing medical costs: increasingly expencive tecnology, liability, unhealthy lifestyles etc..

Ed's point is right on. These drivers of increasing medical costs are fed by the personal choices every person makes. People must want to cooperate for the greater good. Corporate entities are really just people who want to make more money every year. You know the reasons why...we all do, including physicians, nurses, techs, patients, etc.

Technology is corporate. Lawyers and insurance are corporate. Smoking is corporate, though shrinking in value. Medical education is increasingly corporate because the costs of the buildings, insurance, payrolls, utilities and supplies are corporate costs plus profit. In each case, money is the object.
All down the line, at each level, everyone wants and expects to get a profit...and more and more each year. When a product is created for the "healthcare industry", it is marked up many times its real cost to produce plus reasonable profit. Insurance companies stand behind (way behind) Medicare in what they pay.

Take the "business" out of medicine.

More pain and suffering will be needed before we learn to share.

The health care industrialists do not take the Hippocratic oath. They are in business to make money like any other business. Our reality is sick individuals are loosing their savings and lives, and their families are stressed and broken under the current system. That said, I do not think we need to completely dismantle the present system but our elected officials need to set in place regulations that do not allow the insurance companies to set policies or continue practices that are life threatening and onerous to their customers. When the CEO of an insurance company can earn one dollar for every 700 made by the company-something is very wrong. As a teacher in Wisconsin my salary was capped under then Governor Tommy Thompson. It is still capped. The people of Wisconsin believe this is just because they have been told it keeps their property taxes down. I am amazed that this same electorate does not seem as outraged at the cost of health insurance compared to the profits and salaries being made by the heath insurance companies. There is something off about what is acceptable business practice in the public domain versus what is acceptable in the private domain. I am encouraged by the many courageous medical professionals and patients who have come forward to expose yet another broken system. Sincerely, M. Vasquez

Great show. although I am concerned that there seems to be an assuption that medicare could be expanded to everyone. If you ask any doctor/hospital they will tell you if all of thier patients had medicare they would go out of buisness. The reembursement is frequently not enouph to pay the expences. That is why some states require doctors to accept medicare to get a medical license to make sure someone is forced to work for nothing. A doctor who actually paid for his education (not his/her dad) would never go to medical school since medicare would never pay enouph to pay back the cripling dept. This is how our government is controlling the cost at this time.
A single payer system would save on administrative costs but there was no discussion on how it would control the real drivers of increasing medical costs: increasingly expencive tecnology, liability, unhealthy lifestyles etc.. In other countries with Government run programs these costs are controlled by rationing and stiff regulation. Acually that would be fine with me but people need to know what the trade off is.
Ed

Senator Baucus' stammering when asked about single-pay was telling. "It won't pass" was his answer. So he - one man - refuses to bring it up with equal time as lobbyist-sponsored proposals for discussion...
Senator - and you should be prepared to discard that title at the next election - please do us all a favor and take that high-paying lobbyist job now so we can have someone in your seat that might actually want to help the public good.

I live in Canada and like most of the free world we have nationalized health care and it works. Everyone pays a small premium and when you get sick you go to the doctor of your choice and get what you need whatever it is. Don't let the money changers fool you on this, it works and your country needs it, employers can't afford to pay for health care all by themselves.

Thank you for your presentation of the Health care problem. I support single health payer and really appreciate your airing of the subject. Good on you!

Thanks, Karon.

As always, Bill Moyers has created an informative program that demonstrates what many of us already know...single payer is the only option for affordable healthcare. When will Americans demand what the rest of the world already has? One group that is mobilizing is www.singlepayeraction.org. Everybody in. Nobody out. Take away the $400 billion that is paid to the healthcare industry and insurance companies for administration costs and bring the 47 million plus that are uninsured into an affordable plan. It is mindboggling that we allow these elected officials to continue to get away with this.

International corporations would like to be rid of health care costs for US workers and especially their retired workers. They would be in favor of single-payer health care for their won bottom line.
BTW: there is food insurance. It's called Food Stamps.

The single-payer plan should be limited . . .
Posted by: Larry Schanz

We already have a system that limits healthcare based on private profit, it's a bit premature to start talking about limiting benefits in a program that has yet to be implemented.

The insurance run healthcare system is denying any coverage to several million Americans based on their ability to pay and limiting doctor specified treatments and medicines to many of those who do have coverage. If this plan is implemented, every American will have access to basic healthcare and the loss of 20,000 Americans a year due to no access will cease to be a national embarrassment. I'm afraid that those who expect to get their Tummy Tucks and Liposuction procedures through the new system will be sorely disappointed !

What is the cost to us, the taxpayer for Congress members' healthcare? Are they covered by this government-sponsored healthcare for life, even after they leave office? On our side of the fence, a person with Dick Cheney's health problems, we would be denied (or pay an exorbitant premium price for) healthcare because of a pre-existing condition. I would love to know what the cost to the taxpayer was for HIS health coverage. It seems to me that congress members have no incentive to get good health for US because WE have provided excellent coverage for THEM? If we had this information, could they be shamed into getting a decent system set up for the american public? How about an amendment to Constiution - If the american public doesn't have good healthcare, neither does the congress. If they were in the same boat are we are (all of us dealing with the same disfunctional system) I bet something would get done post haste. Insurance companies like the work-based insurance system b/c people who are working are most likely fairly healthy.

BOTTOM LINE - greedy "health" insurance companies are protecting their profits at our expense. Everything the health insurance companies throw out there (majority of it lies) against a national health care system is FEAR-inducing to scare folks into keeping the current, broken system that lines their pockets with profits.

The single-payer plan should be limited to people with valid Social Security numbers.
No service for illegal aliens.
There should be a high co-pay for office visits to keep people from abusing the system. Preferably, national health care should be for major medical only. When the patient does not pay any of the costs, they don't care what it costs.

Tim wrote: "Why don't we have a single-payer for food? Why don't we get rid of all supermarkets, and let the government play the single/solitary/monopolistic middleman for food? Do people really think getting rid of the "wasteful" market competition among food distributors would actually save money and bring higher quality and quantity of food? .... the problem is being monopolist. Monopolies are inefficient; "

With respect, medicine is, like food, a necessity of life. When some food is too expensive, people choose cheaper food or go to the local food bank. There is, as yet, no such thing as food insurance. Additionally, government is only monopolistic because we the people have barely exercised our civic duties to "throw the bums out" when our public servants do not act in our best interest. Democracy is time consuming, and requires an educated middle class. How are we doing? Market competition in medicine is what has raised the cost unsustainably. When we take the "business" out of medicine, it will return to the profession it is supposed to be. The only way to take the "business" out of medicine is to have public medicine. So single payer may not be the nirvana we seek, but it is the next step for the greater good. People, and physicians are people, need to do things for the right reasons, not for money/profit. America needs a change of heart. Greed is not good. Love is the way forward, and sharing resources is the only method to provide justice in healthcare.

It may take more pain and suffering for us to be motivated by something other than personal gain.

As the government continues the status quo "dysfunctional" the intent is to sweep
"the single payer health insurance" issue under the carpet.
After campaigning for a CHANGE now
" Obama says we can't have single payer health insurance".
I too "have one thing to say to him on the subject:
YES WE CAN!"
Stop providing us with the old MANTRA!
The solution should be at the ballot and not in the hands of the OLIGARCHY!
The people should not be forced on the streets to demonstrates for what is RIGHT
and PRIVILEGE!
"AMMEND THE CONSTITUTION"
EMPOWER THE PEOPLE TO EXPRESS "THEIR WILL on ALL ISSUES"!

The Senate version of the Single Payer bill is called the "American Health Security Act of 2009", it is available on line in .PDF format and is 172 pages long. Everything you every wanted to know about claiming your right to full healthcare coverage !

As far as Medicare and Medicaid is concerned, the bill stipulates that these programs will be folded into the Single Payer program when and if it is implemented. Some special cases are exempt such as military healthcare delivery which has always been a single payer program funded through the Pentagon Budget.

Excellent show this week on health care reform. It really helped provide great insight into the current state of our health care system, and the great alternative to that system that is Single Payer. Not even my wife, who is a Registered Nurse, knew what Single Payer health care is - that is how little known this alternative plan really is to the American people. We need more discussions like this to make people aware of the cruelty and moral bankruptcy of a profit-driven health care system, and to get the American people mobilized to force our representatives do what must be done - shut down the health insurance industry and enact a tax-payer funded Single Payer system in its place. It's time to end our shameful legacy of profits before people.

The program was excellent. I am totally in favor of single payer health care and getting the greedy insurance companies out of the health picture. I manage a small non-profit and there is no way I could pay for health insurance for my employees and even if I could the coverage would be skimpy and loaded with exclusions for pre-existing conditions, etc. I greatly appreciate the work of the California Nurses' Association, Sidney Wolfe of Public Citizen, and David Himmelstein of Physicians for a National Health Program.

My friend in Australia, which has a single payer system, has been battling cancer for ten years and tells me that her only expense has been the gas for her car to get her to the hospital!

Thank you Bill Moyers for your informative program on single-payer--the only sensible health care reform. As has been made clear, our elected representatives in the white house and on capitol hill are not listening to us. (I'm a big Obama fan, but very disappointed in his cave to the insurance industry.) As Mr. Moyer's guests pointed out, if we had leadership from Obama, Pelosi, and Reid, single-payer health care WOULD get passed. It's what the majority of Americans, including doctors and nurses, want. With congress throwing away pro-single-payer faxes, keeping their voice-mail-boxes full, and arresting people who speak out in the senate, what is left for us to make our voices heard?

Two suggestions have been made in earlier comments:

1. A mass demonstration in Washington DC. This would require an organizer to pull all single-payer proponents together in DC on a single day while congress is in session.

2. Boycott the insurance industry. This would require sacrifice on the part of the currently healthy: forego employer-based health insurance and self-pay for routine care until the insurance industry no longer has the funds with which to purchase our government.

I don't know anything about this single-payer stuff, but if it would cover spine transplants, I'm all for it.

http://photos.upi.com/topics-Thomas-Daschle/d7c31f395ed3b9aa113237b9f75b6c92/Thomas-Daschle_12.jpg

Tim,

You are wrong in terms of health care. Until Medicare Part D was rammed thru Congress (thanks AARP, which made megabillions off that), Medicare was VERY efficient. I think overhead was like 3%.

Single payer worked just fine and Medicare could simply be expanded.

We are paying many times more for healthcare than any other nation, so why isn't the health of our citizens number one?

It's not.

Social change has come hard. The middle class was built on a great deal of sacrifice and a lot of bloodshed.

Is it realistic to expect to get a universal health plan in this day and age by demonstrating, writing letters, and making phone calls?

What has to happen to get Medicare for all? As radical as this may sound,
perhaps we need to bankrupt the health insurers first. Of course, this requires risk and sacrifice.

How do we bankrupt them? Every healthy person and family would need to drop their private insurance, leaving only the sick. Boycott has been historically effective in bringing about social change.

If we're serious about this, we must be willing to sacrifice for it.

There is a strong, solid and quiet voice in this which is the researcher-physicians who are on the cutting edge who do not want single-payer or Canada-style healthcare because they feel it will cut off opportunities for cutting edge research. I this this issue has to be addressed head on, because I believe these people have a thumb on the scales; they have authority, and I think somehow, they are using (it's a symbiotic relationship perhaps) the insurance industry to strong arm Congress because it serves their interests (and their work is important). There are few of them, relatively speaking, and they don't need to put themselves out publicly as long as the insurance companies and lobbyists are doing an adequate job fighting for their side, but they are there, and politically speaking their views have to be taken into account (if you ever want to win on single-payer).

Perhaps it is a matter of separating out, analytically, health care from medicine. That may sound strange, but "medicine" is a field of research--and it has been a lucrative one for some (unlike other intellectual activities in most fields). I don't know how insurance companies and medical research work together exactly, but I do think that logically it makes sense that insurance companies are somehow helping medical authorities, who then turn around and support the medical insurance industry. The point is, if the proponents of single payer simply try to denounce insurance comapanies as greedy, saying their position is all about profits and nothing else, they are going to run into the buzz saw of "medical authority" which likes the "private" system because it pays for their research--which is a public good, btw. Authoritative medicine and medical research as an intellectual practice must be dealt with apart from medical practice that is clinical and patient-care focused. This dilemma must be addressed head on.

Perhaps, as part of any proposed single-payer health CARE proposal, there should also simultaneously be a companion proposal to fund cutting-edge research, some huge grant program for research hospitals and physicians who are working in labs, and doing science, etc. Put the two together, and get the medical authorities on board--drive a wedge between the insurance industry and doctors who just want to do research and make a good living doing it.

I have two short questions to those non-believers, if our insurance system is so great why aren't are countries adopting our technique of providing insurance? Why aren't residents in these other countries what to support such a system as the US Insurance System?

A short time ago I watched a documentary that Michael Moore provided by traveling to countries outside of United States who provide health care as a single payer system, United Kingdom, France, Canada and even Cuba. It is well worth watching. His documentary concurs with what Dr's Sidney Wolfe and David Himmelstein. I wish Bill Moyer would air Moore's take on comparing the US insurance system with those of other countries.

Even Obama says we can't have single payer health insurance.

I have one thing to say to him on the subject:

YES WE CAN!

Has anyone paid attention to how real life fire stations are run? They are far from being efficient. When a firefighter job is open, there are hundreds if not thousands of applicants. The positions are way over-paid! That's why many states and cities are going bankrupt!

Why don't we have a single-payer for food? Why don't we get rid of all supermarkets, and let the government play the single/solitary/monopolistic middleman for food? Do people really think getting rid of the "wasteful" market competition among food distributors would actually save money and bring higher quality and quantity of food? Sure, all the "waste" on Sunday fliers will be eliminated. You can experience that kind of efficiency first hand in North Korea! It's not about socialist or fascist or any other political persuation per se; the problem is being monopolist. Monopolies are inefficient; whatever "-ism" only comes along later as a fig leaf to brainwash the public into tolerating the deteriorating living standards resulting from the inefficiencies of monopolies.

As a US citizen, now living in Sweden, I say bring on social heath care! The quality and accessiblity I have to health care is far better than anything I had in the US. THe argument against single payer are scare tactics by the industry.

Thank you Bill Moyers for bringing single payer health care reform to the table. This is the one forum on the air, that allows viewers to have all the necessary information to sift through in order to make intelligent decisions. Nurse/organizer, Donna was
inspiring and articulate. Drs. Himmelstein and Wolfe made insightful comments that enlightened. It is becoming obvious that big health insurance/pharmaceutical dollars are controlling Congress and the President. I must say that it was a disappointment to hear Obama talking single payer advocacy a few years ago as a Congressman and then doing an about face as President. All the more reason to hold him to the fire where his words and promises are concerned. Yes WE CAN turn him around, if the people come out in droves in support of true health care reform and break through Max Baucus's fortress. We can and we will!

We need to have a massive rally in Washington for Single Payer, just like the Civil Rights Movement; it is no less important. Who knows how to organize this? Let us know where to go and we'll be there with signs and banners. They take to the streets in France, Britain, everywhere else in the world; yet in the U.S. we have become like sheep, just accepting our fate. Just as we filled the streets of Washington when Obama was elected, let us fill the streets again for Single Payer!!

For an example of a heavy-handed reaction to expressing support for the single payer system, go to health-justice.org and see the outrageous reaction of Congressman Waxman's office.

I supported Medicare for all long before Baucus sold his seat to the insurance industry.

The 5/22/09 Bill Moyers' Journal program is an intellectually honest investigation of our broken healthcare system.

Any politician even attempting to deny voters Medicare for ALL should be ousted from office in upcoming elections to protect the many from the few.

Thank you for the show you did on May 22. Diane Rehms did a similar show on Monday of this week. I got inspired to write my Senators and Representative. I will follow that up with phone calls. Jim Wallis says that to change the direction in Washington you have to change the direction of the wind. If enough people make their voices heard, our politicans will start to understand that the wind has changed. Thank you for reporting on this issue--please keep the heat on!

Please see below how the Swiss system work. We need to eliminate the for profit world in healthcare, mandate that everyone is to be insured.

he social health insurance guarantees medical treatment in case of illness or accidents, if not covered by the accident insurance.
There exist 94 different insurers (“health insurances”), which are not allowed to strive for profit. In case one of the insurers becomes insolvent, the costs of governmental services will be covered by the so-called common institution.
The insurers are not only responsible for the refund of services, but they also support the health aid together with the cantons (are the common leaders of the Swiss foundation for health aid).
Every person with domicile in Switzerland has to be insured (every person staying in Switzerland has to become insured within 3 months). You can individually organize that. The insured party can also choose freely his/her health insurer. Every health insurance is compulsorily obliged to admit every applicant, who has his/her domicile in the area of activity of the health insurance, for the basic insurance. As far as the additional insurance is concerned, which includes all services exceeding the obligatory basic insurance, the insurers are free to choose which contracts to take out with whom. They are allowed to reject applicants and they can freely determine bonuses.

From a purely mathematical perspective, single payer is clearly the most logical choice. Right now, we are paying not just for health care, but also for the administration of literally hundreds of different insurance plans. Take the insurance companies and their profits--which are considerable--out of the equation, and health care instantly becomes less expensive. Providers won't have any less incentive to compete, so the free market can still work (to the extent that it works with health care) in that patients can still choose their own doctors. But we won't have to spend additional money, paying people whose first responsibility is to their share-holders rather than patients.

Let's put aside what we've been told by the insurance companies and do what makes sense.

Annette Kay said (in part):

"I am now on Medicare and have never had a problem here in this country when it looked like I needed hip surgery. I immediately got an MRI and a bone scan and an appointment for a hip replacement two weeks later."

It seems like the "socialized" part of the good old American medical system (Medicare) came through for you. And I am supposing you did not experience long waiting lines, cruel public servants chosing your doctor for you, substandard care, etc.

Wow, socialized medicine seems to be working fine in America! Let's extend it to everyone!

The program was excellent. I am totally in favor of single payer health care and getting the greedy insurance companies out of the health picture. I manage a small non-profit and there is no way I could pay for health insurance for my employees and even if I could the coverage would be skimpy and loaded with exclusions for pre-existing conditions, etc. I greatly appreciate the work of the California Nurses' Association, Sidney Wolfe of Public Citizen, and David Himmelstein of Physicians for a National Health Program.

My friend in Australia has been battling cancer for ten years and tells me that her only expense has been the gas for her car to get her to the hospital!

I cannot let e rubins comments "that all single payer people want is someone else pay their bills, what business has the government run well--and you want them in charge of your healthcare costs" go unanswered. Single payer WILL NOT BE FREE. There will be a reasonable tax from a large insurance pool to be paid instead of outrageous increasingly unaffordable insurance premiums and higher costs of goods and services that result from employer based health insurance. Employers pass the cost on to YOU--YOU PAY NOW! Employer based health insurance just makes our goods and services less competitive. The cost of health care will not begin to decline until we stop feeding the middlemen of a huge and unnecessary insurance company bureaucracy whose greatest accomplishment to date has been to leave 47 million uninsured, an equal number under-insured and untold thousands who have died or gone bankrupt. YOU call that an accomplishment! As for the government Medicare and Social Security are among the most sucessful programs of all time. Do you call the roads on which the countries commerce runs and on which you drive YOUR car a failure? Are the education system, police, fire deparment, defense, NASA, failures? I have Medicare and YES I DO want a government run healthcare system. I want healthcare that is in the patients and the countries medical and economic best interests and not that of insurance companies. Medicare and Social Security are not called the third rail of politics for nothing! Touch it and your dead as Republicans learned again this last election cycle.

There have been many excellent comments from mainstreet on Bill Moyers healthcare program but is anyone in the Congress or the White House listening? The people with the power to enact the change probably will not read your commentaries. As one commentator suggested, we have DO SOMETHING. Check the commentaries again for suggested phone numbers and web sites such as voting bloc.org. I suggest Obama's web page, www.whitehouse.gov which urges you visit healthreform.gov to get more information and join the discussion on health reform. "We want to hear what you think about healthcare reform" "share your story and ideas". I say let him have it with your comments. Sign the petition for HR676 on Healthcare-Now.org and support their activities any way you can. Michael Berla is right on with campaign finance reform, Washington is for sale. At the local Democratic party meetings I tried to get a resolution on campaign finance reform adopted. I failed for now but perhaps you will succeed. You can find phone numbers and email addresses to contact your congress people on the issues at www.house.gov and www.senate.gov.

When will are these single payer people admit all they want is someone else to pay their bills.what business has the government ever run well,NONE,and you want them in charge of your health care costs.

There is one Very Large Problem with a single payer health care delivery system. The problem to be specific is that AMERICA DOES NOT HAVE ONE!!!!!!!

"I'm not looking to overthrow the U$ Government. The Corporate $tate already has" John Trudell.
As long as our rotten not caring certainly not health care system is run for profit by our corporate rulers we, the people lose.Just like our for profit jail system puts us all behind bars for minor crimes mostly committed because of unlivable slave wages. But the greed and plundering of our collective wealth by our Corporate rulers goes unpunished. Could we waterboard them?

Senator Baucaus and all Congress people in the pockets of insurance companies and banking industries are a disgrace. They could care less about their constituents. This issue makes that charge abundantly clear.

How is it that a nation as rich and powerful as the United States allows so many of its citizens to go without the health care they need? How many lack health insurance? How many cannot afford it, or bankrupt themselves because of medical expenses, even when they have health insurance? How could our government of, by and for the people permit such preventable tragedies to occur?

Listen to Senator Baccus: “Well, just to be honest, it's not on the table - the only thing that's not - because it cannot pass. It just cannot pass. We can't squander this opportunity. We can't spend - we can't waste capital on something that's just impossible.”

It is not surprising that Senator Baucus, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, cares nothing about a national health insurance program that is supported by the majority of the public, doctors and nurses; cares nothing about the thousands of people who die every year because they can't get health care; cares nothing about the more than one million citizens who go into bankruptcy every year due to medical debt - even though most of them had insurance when they got sick.

This is the same Senator Baccus who voted to defeat Illinois Senator Durban’s legislation that would have given judges the ability to adjust distressed homeowners’ mortgage terms in bankruptcy proceedings and avoid foreclosure. Senator Durban asked, “Why is it in this country, in America, that we can find hundreds of billions of taxpayers' dollars from hard-working people all over the United States to come to the rescue of bad banking decisions, rotten investments, mortgages that were fraudulent on their face, but can't summon the political will to do something about 8 million families in America who are going to face foreclosure?” He answered his own question, "Frankly, this place is owned by the banks."

A similar question, why is it in this country, in America, that we can find hundreds of billions of taxpayers' dollars to come to the rescue of bad banking decisions, rotten investments, mortgages that were fraudulent on their face, but can't summon the political will to do something about the millions of our fellow citizens who can’t get the health care they need or go bankrupt due to their medical debts? The answer is the same old story. Senator Baccus is a large recipient of health insurance and drug company donations. Facts mean nothing to most Senators because they respond to only one standard tool of advocacy: money, and lots of it. The Senate is not only owned by the banks, it is also owned by the current wealthy health care corporate interests. The Democrats are no different than the Republicans. Our government is not of, by and for the people. It has been bought.

Justice Brandeis once said, “We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can’t have both.”

There have been many excellent comments from mainstreet on Bill Moyers healthcare program but is anyone in the Congress or the White House listening? The people with the power to enact the change probably will not read your commentaries. As one commentator suggested, we have DO SOMETHING. Check the commentaries again for suggested phone numbers and web sites such as voting bloc.org. I suggest Obama's web page, www.whitehouse.gov which urges you visit healthreform.gov to get more information and join the discussion on health reform. "We want to hear what you think about healthcare reform" "share your story and ideas". I say let him have it with your comments. Michael Berla is right on with campaign finance reform, Washington is for sale. At the local Democratic party meetings I tried to get a resolution on campaign finance reform adopted. I failed for now but perhaps you will succeed. You can find phone numbers and email addresses to contact your congress people on the issues at www.house.gov and www.senate.gov.

It's tragic that AMerican leaders have been so cowed by the Insurance and Pharma Industries that they will shy away from the only sensible solution: Single-Payer Healthcare.

I was absolutely riveted by the program. And felt a surreal chill realizing that I'd not heard a thing about the protests by health professionals on the mainstream news! This was all censored? Creepy. This show makes 60 Minutes look like scrap paper. What would happen if this program was shown at prime time on NBC?

Nothing of value will happen on this or any other critical issue facing America as long as private money determines who is elected. The only way out is public financing of election campaigns. Public financing underlies the entire reform effort in the U.S.

To list of the Rallys around the country next weekend go to:

http://www.healthcare-now.org/campaigns/may-30th-day-of-action/

Hope you cover them!

In the past 50 or so years we as a nation have tried to pass universal health care several times by several different names. For many reasons it has never passed. Now we have another surge to try and get it through the congress and have it signed into law by the president.

This time the supporters of the project are calling it "single payer" coverage. The new system is supposed to eliminate waste by simplifying the way healthcare professionals are paid for their care and services. Supporters, many of them doctors, nurses and other professionals think it is a good plan, however those that oppose the system such as health care insurance and pharmaceutical companies are mounting expensive lobbying and advertising campaigns to stop the passage of this important legislation.

The opposition to the system is using the tried and true scare words to stop the proposal from being passed. Those words are socialism and communism. They say if a universal health care system passes we will become a socialist or communist state rather than a democracy. And, these are the same folks that think bailing-out the financial system which includes Wall Street, banks, the auto industry and insurance companies then taking over the running of the companies is perfectly all right.

According to the supporters of "single payer" their system will reduce the cost of health care by cutting out billing procedures and the way approval is granted to the providers for various necessary medical procedures to patients. The idea is to simplify the system. The problem is that insurance and pharmaceutical companies see the new system as a way to cut into their profits.

These are the companies that spend millions of dollars lobbying congress and advertising to influence the public. The advertising people include the "Swift Boat" folks. You may remember them from the Bush - Kerry election.

Average persons in the country need to come together as a group to try and sell this important project. Write your congress person become an activist. If we can spend trillions of dollars on wars and bailouts for the financial industry we should be able to provide universal health care for our citizens. "Single Payer Coverage" seems to present a way to have this happen.

Yes, single-payer health care is the way to go.

Please!!!! What happened that transmission was cut off during Bill Moyer's program 5/22/09?

I listened in vain last night to your show about single payer insurance - no mention whatsoever about the exorbitant liability inurance premiums paid by doctors to protect their butts from the litigious american public. I have been made to think that these premiums are part of the high medical costs in our country. gc

Pres. Harry Truman proposed universal single payer health care the year I was born in his special address to Congress May, 1947. Here we are still talking, talking, talking about an issue other developed nations have already addressed. Yet here we all are 62 years after Truman's address, pacified and fear-filled as we pay our taxes with little return on government's responsibility -- safety and well-being of its tax paying citizens. What an excellent Journal on May 22, 2009 -- obviously, it's time for long overdue citizen action demanding what other developed countries have --- health care is NOT a for profit enterprise. See everyone in Washington, DC and around the country lift our citizen voice to make single payer health care a reality. Thank you too California RNs and doctors taking action and featured on the program.

I am in support of the single payer program. I am a 34 year old female. I am employed. I have no health insurance, and don't make enough money from my job to pay for insurance. The last time I had health insurance was over ten years ago. I have a need for health care. I sustained a knee injury when I was a teen, and it tore ligaments and cartilage. I need to have surgery to fix it. Obviously being uninsured, I can't afford to pay for such a surgery, and insurance companies regard my knee issue as a pre-existing condition, and therefore deny me any coverage. My knee may not seem like such a big deal, after all it isn't terminal cancer. However, it has severely limited my mobility and hence has contributed to me gaining over 100 lbs over the past 10 years. The weight gain puts more pressure on my knee, which is now even worse than before. It has become a sort of domino effect. The weight gain puts me at higher risk for diabetes, which runs in my family. When I had insurance 10 years ago, I told my doctor about my knee, which he brushed it off and thought of it as nothing more than me being a worry wart. In reality, the insurance company would deny my surgery, making my need for insurance completely pointless. I have been waiting patiently for something to be done about our health care system so that I may get this issue taken care of. I find the selfish and ignorant behavior of the insurance companies disgusting. I also don't understand the fear behind socialized medicine. Is there really anything so wrong with everyone having quality care? What makes John Doe next door more deserving of care than me?? Is it because he makes more money?? Is that really fair? I thought we were all created equal.

New Health Care Structure

Part of the reason for the high cost is that health providers don't get paid for many of uninsured. Rising prices cause more people will do without insurance. The results have been an upward spiral in health care costs.

The goal of a new health care system could be to get everyone in the system, have competitive pricing, and not to disrupt the health insurance plans that people currently have.

People without health insurance could have a health tax that their employers would send to the government. The employer would have the option of paying all, part, or none of this health tax.

Self-employed people and people receiving other types of income would send the tax to the government. People could opt out of this tax by getting their own qualifying health coverage.

The health tax amount would be determined by age and dependents. This tax would not be more than a certain percentage of a person's total incomes. The percentage of income allowed for the tax could be higher for older people.

Of course health insurance companies would try to insure the healthest people, leaving the higher risk people to be insured by the government. To somewhat offset this insurance companies could be required to take a certain percentage of their customers from the government.

This type of health care system and various other types of health plans could be tried by different states. The federal government could adopt one of the best plans, then states could still opt out of the federal plan with their own plan.

First of all, Ms. Smith and others in her organization are heroes. Also Dr. Himmelstein and Dr. Wolfe are outstanding advocates on this issue. It’s about time that someone stood up and explain the difference between single payer where the government is the administrator and socialized medicine where the doctors and hospitals work for the government. This needs to be done every time the opponents of single payer try to confuse the two.

Single Payer is the only way to go. Health insurance companies are a business, like any other, whose primary purpose is to make money. This is no different than a company that sells software or shoes or anything else; the product they are selling happens to be health insurance. They make money by selling policies for more money than it costs them to payout on those policies. By definition then, no health insurance company is going to do anything that upset’s that equation like covering people with preexisting conditions. The healthcare crisis therefore cannot and will not ever be resolved while profit seeking businesses are providing health insurance.

I do however think that in order to control costs patients need to have some financial stake in their medical care. A progressive system of premiums, deductibles, copays and out of pocket maximums based on gross income would be most equitable. As would premium surcharges for smokers, the overweight, substance abusers, felons and anyone else engaging in controllable behaviors that increase their risk of needing medical care. An increase in the employer portion of the Medicare tax would subsidize the cost of a single payer plan since most businesses would save tremendous amounts of money by no longer providing medical benefits.

And finally, a PPO approach to paying physicians would ensure choice and maintain the competitive model necessary to maintain excellence. The physicians that have made a name for themselves can opt out of the PPO plan if they feel that patients are willing to incur more of the cost themselves in order to be treated by the best physician. They would by paid a percentage of the charges billed. Those in the PPO will be paid at PPO rates.
I will be publishing a book shortly with the specific details of how a single payer plan could work and how it would be paid for.

The reason President Obama didn't just jump into the national health insurance issue and came up with a hybrid plan is that we continue to have frightened voters. Voters that are soooo afraid we'll turn into a socialistic country. Hello!! we are a socialistic/capitalistic hybrid economy. One that has worked very well up until now. the capitalistic side has developed major problems (lack of oversight, greed) and the socialistic aspect of our economy is going broke because of the meltdown in our financial markets (job losses, lost tax revenues). I think Obama's plan is a good start, but will the Dems in congress let him get this going?

I am a Family Physcician who has been in practice for over 30 years. I have seen countless numbers of patients who ultimately did not get the care they needed because they were either uninsured or underinsured. Some have died or have faced financial ruin as a consequence. As the leader of the world's free nations our country should be ashamed that we let this continue, all for the sake of preserving a broken system of healthcare financing that enriches those who support it.

Medical practices are very inefficient from a business perspective. Electronic Medical Records will not resolve this problem. The primary cause of inefficiency is the maze of rules and requirements that physicians and their staffs must negotiate in order to get care for their patients.I have been continually frustrated by the ongoing complexities and roadblocks to care that surface daily from insurance companies. It's a travesty that our elected officials won't even allow an open debate about the virtues of a single-payer system that would go far to allow doctors and nurses to spend more time caring for patients and less time playing the insurance game.

I strongly support a single-payer system. We need Medicare for all, financed by the billions currently paid in premiums to the health insurance industry. Single-payer will give patients more choice, and doctors and hospitals will then have to compete on the one element that they should ... Quality of Care.

From a financial perspective, the U.S. can't afford not to do this. We already pay more than double per capita than any other nation in the world for healthcare, and our population outcomes for health and longevity are dismal at best. U.S. businesses are hampered by the cost of healthcare while they try to compete globally with companies who are free from this requirement.

I believe that single-payer would be politically feasible if the public would have access to an honest debate about its virtues. Currently the public is bombarded by propaganda that is motivated by special interest groups who want the current system to survive in some form. I believe that if the public truly understood the facts by honest discussion and debate, Medicare for all could happen now. The time is right but the level of public misunderstanding about this is incredible. Some of my most conservative patients who are covered by Medicare have been heard to say, "don't touch my Medicare whatever you do!!" Yet they see "Medicare for all" as a system of socialized medicine.

I know of no alternative models of healthcare financing that would be affordable and that could so dramatically improve access to care for all. The time for a single-payer system is now. It must be included in the health reform agenda and discussions.

Here is a recent post from newsletter@Health-justice.org about congresspersons receiving faxes from Americans wishing to express their views about "healthcare reform" which is being shaped in DC and without input from people who will be impacted:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Have You Been Ignored Long Enough?
Are You Mad Enough About It Yet?
Memorial Day Weekend, 2009
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear ........
Here's the story so far. On Friday, many of you sent a fax from our website telling the House Energy & Commerce (E&C), Ways & Means(W&M) and Education & Labor(E&L) committees that you did not want to keep the insurance you have and you did not want forced purchase of health insurance. Because the combined membership of those committees is about 150 congresspersons, your faxes were sent directly to the fax numbers of the committees themselves. The expectation was that your faxes would be delivered to committee members by the committee staff as part of the government employee's duty.
Instead, by mid-afternoon, the E&C staff was faxing back to our fax vendor all the faxes they received. By late afternoon, they were faxing them directly to our Salt Lake office. In late afternoon, I called to inquire why and was told (rudely) by an employee that they were not supposed to give these faxes to Congresspersons and we were not supposed to send them faxes. Moreover, I was told, the employee knew that some or all of the faxes were coming from fake email addresses because they (the employees) had phoned the persons on the email signature and confirmed that these persons had not sent any fax.
A short while later, I received a call from "Max" at the E&C committee who rebuked me for sending faxes, told me they had to unplug their fax machine, said he had investigated me and I was a "radical" and asked whether I knew it was a Federal offense to "break" government fax machines (he is wrong.) He assured me that he would not prosecute me but that maybe Nancy Pelosi would, except that she had "bigger fish to fry."
What really concerned me was this: Max said the E&C staff were throwing all the faxes into the trash, except for one copy that they would show the chairman, Mr. Waxman. He suggested that the only way to contact the congresspersons on the committee was to have individuals from their district send individual faxes to their individual congressperson.
Recognizing that if faxes were going into the trash, nothing was being accomplished, I diverted all faxes being sent to the committees (E&C, W&M, E&L and Senate committees) to our email (for future use), while maintaining the fax flow to Pelosi, Baucus and the White House.
I then immediately sent an email to you suggesting that the chairs of the subject committees (Waxman, Miller and Rangel) would like to hear your opinion of their committee staff. I gave you the relevant office phone numbers.
Within minutes of that email to you, I received multiple phone calls from you asking why you were unable to contact the named committee chairmen. It seems that you all had the same experience and I confirmed this with my own calls. Waxman's voicemail was full and there was no way to leave a message. You could and did leave messages with Miller's voicemail. Rangel's phone just rang and rang without answering.
Of course, those of you that called me were frustrated and angry. Many of you expressed a feeling of impotent rage; others felt that if this is how our government treated us, we should simply withdraw and protect ourselves, essentially becoming gun-toting enclave-building isolationists. Still others expressed despair at their personal situation and the unbelievable arrogance that has destroyed the hope we expected with Obama.
Obviously, Washington insiders, including our elected and unelected employees, are doing their very best to ignore what we are saying. We have known that for months. Now we know it is taking a direct and threatening form of actively trashing our message.
The question now is: What do we do? How angry are we? What can we do? I am setting out some options below. I really want your thoughts. I would do this by way of a poll, but this feedback seems more important. There are about 4900 people who directly receive this email. If you send me 4900 responses, I will read every one of them. I want your help in deciding what to do and how to do it.
i don't want to give up, but i am just one person and cannot effect change alone. I need your ideas and your help. Send them to me by email here.
Sincerely
Clark Newhall MD JD
clark.newhall@health-justice.org

The Three Options I See
Be Polite
Give Up
Get In Their Faces
Option 1: Be Polite and Follow the Rules Congressmen Want Us To Follow
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We can continue our campaign of faxes and phone calls but we can make a 'pick list' for each fax so you can pick which congresspersons or senators your fax should go to. That way, you can send faxes only to your own elected representatives. This is the method that has been and continues to be used by all other organizations attempting to influence Congress. Call it the "grass roots" method.
The obvious drawback is that the impact of several hundred faxes on one message is eliminated. The supposed advantage is that Congresspersons pay attention mainly to those missives (phone calls, faxes, etc.) that come from their own constituents. Supposedly, fifty faxes to Congressman X from only his constituents is more effective than 5000 faxes from voters all around the country. What do you think?
.

Option 2: Give Up
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Given that we are ignored -- given that Obama is not going to lead us to real health reform -- given that Baucus and most other legislators are owned by the insurance industry -- given that you and I do not have unlimited money and time--
Given all these givens, why keep trying? Face it, we are screwed. Whatever we do is futile. Let's give up.

Option 3: Get Louder and Closer
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I don't mean louder telephone calls or more faxes. i mean travel to Washington. All of us. Everyone else we know that can and will come. 1 thousand, 100 thousand or 1 million. Whatever we can muster. Gather on one day. Make a loud noise.
I have been told that it costs $12 per person to organize a mass event. I have been told that organizing a mass event in Washington will require at least two months and ten organizers.
I don't have the money or the employees to do this. You and I would have to do it together. You would be the organizers. You would be the fund-raisers. You would be the people gathering and you would be the people getting 1000 other people to gather. All on the same day. All in Washington. All with one purpose. Get Congress and the White House to listen to the demand for real health care for all.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
phone: 801-363-8888 Email: clark.newhall@health-justice.org
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Let democracy work if there is one like other countries.

It is time for the NATIONAL REFERENDUM on SINGLE PAYER.

Universal Health Care System is the only way to go forward in this civilized society. It has been proven to function very well in other civilized countries and it will work in America. Let's the doctors take the charge, not the insurance companies.
In addition, it will save America 400+ billion $$ a year, the money that could be spent to solve many other problems facing our country today.
Alex

Single-payer makes all the sense in the world. The opposing arguments are not just 'faulty,' they are well-financed lies.

BUT, we must consider this part of our 'political reality'...when it comes to the upcoming Health Insurance Decision, the 800 lb. gorrilla in the room is not exactly "the insurance companies" as such (though it seems to be) — THAT is too simplistic: wealthy adversaries vs. unorganized citizens, opposing sides of a debate. No, it's not that scenario.

It is FEAR.

The insurance industry, through its own means and methods we may never be privy to, has worked hard to create a climate of fear and disinformation (1) in the public, and (2) for members of Congress.

There is the surface fear, fairly easy to recognize:

Pass single-payer and you will:

[For patients:]

• lose choices or
  
• have long waits for 'rationed" medical care', or
  
• even die waiting for treatment.

[For Congress:]

• You will lose your re-election due to lack of funding

Remember: there IS no debate. The "opposing side" (single-payer) has been excluded, eliminated, jailed, if necessary.

Not only do thousands of patients die from this imposed phony "health system," so does democracy.

That's the public face of the Fear. To get hundreds (nearly all) of US representatives to behave in a manner contrary to popular opinion, to medical advice and to statistical evidence, I believe requires a fear more deep-seated than the simple (but effective) threat to campaign funding.

We are talking about a deep-rooted fear of 'consequences' if insurance companies are placed outside the healthcare loop. What those consequences are, we do not know. This whole sham 'debate' over universally mandated health insurance, smacks of the same mafioso-style language and posturing as well as limit-setting that we saw in the "Bailout debate." Remember? "We are in charge, Do as we tell you now, or there will be consequences ("the market will collapse, there will be 'disruption' ", etc.)."

The irony, of course, is that in all likelihood, any representative supporting single-payer and (gasp!) promoting it, would get overwhelming constituency backing, enough to win, and enough to counter and even expose the agenda behind the insurance-paid attack ads.

No, the kind of fear we are talking about is one that can get high-rolling public officials like Bernanke and Paulson to tell an entire nation "Pay up now. And don't ask us to say what we will do with the money."

This belies POWER. A power so strong — outside our government & mdash that we are to pretend we do not, dare not, cannot, see it. "Don't look into the sun. Don't look at the emperor's face. Misfortune and death await you." Sound familiar? Have you seen that kind of strong-arming before? If it looks like a duck,...

Ohh...yes, sure, part of this is speculation. When you examine the collective behavior of the players, however, an invisible force becomes apparent. No one can make such mountains move without deep threats and coercion, shrouded in mystery.

The Power-Makers must not be questioned.

When too many look too close to the sun, democracy melts. Rational and desirable things have a way of sliding "off the table."

Help increase the wages of Senators like Baucaus by voting them out of office! It's a Win-Win! They will get the high-paying lobbyist job they are practicing for, and you might get a representative that has your interests at heart. Might. Better keep an eye on their behavior and voting record.

Thank you for airing single payer. It truly is the only path to good health care for all americans. All health care (including those who have no insurance) is presently being paid for now by premium payers and tax payers. Unfortunaley it is extremly costly to pay for the uninsured at the emergeny room rather than prevention and early internevetnion at the Doctor's office. I would submit the first step to new helthcare model should be to decide what we want. Do we want good health care for all or only a few? How do measure good health care? I belive we should define these measures and see how other countries and our current system measure up. I would suggest that infant mortality; life span; coverage; and percentage of GDP as examples. I would encourage you to start the debate to force both political parties to define the paramaters for a good system and then evalute current models in other countries to find the best starting point. Why, if there are know problems with other models that we cann't fix them. Again thank your for your show. I find it to be well balanced, accurate and of great value.

Lobbiest and Corporate Money, yet another reason to implement Congressional Term Limits. Hard to do when the target group is the corrupt members of Congress who are the gatekeepers !

Thanks for the program. Yes we need single payer now.

Let's try this. If Obama wants to really save money, lets target the savings to equal that of Canada, Taiwan or an average of single-payer systems in several counties. There is NO WAY that the insurance/drug industry will voluntarily cut costs that can equal an efficient system.

We all pay for fire protection, and we must do the same for health care. What chaos we'd have if the fire department were privatized in the same Byzantine non-system we have for health care.

Your question near the end of the segment with the Dr.'s about limits was a good one. Here's an answer. We currently limit health care coverage to those who are healthy or can pay for it and those that qualify for Medicaid--leaving more than 45 million people uninsured. Most industrialized countries have successfully found a way to ensure EVERYONE, and there are some limits on what will be covered. No one can pay for everything for everyone. We CAN pay for most things for everyone.

The item you left out of your program that is so important is PREVENTION. Any single-payer system needs to include education and prevention so that there will be fewer sick people to treat.

The problems we have now are lots of sick people, many people who don't pay into any system of health care, skyrocketing costs and no system for education and prevention.

The longer we put off single payer, the more it will costs and the longer more people will needlessly suffer.

Bottom line is that public outrage must outweigh the money that buys Congress. Please do the research, but I'd estimate that 98% or more of the 535 members of Congress take contributions from insurance co.'s, drug companies and for profit health care industries. Enough public outrage before August could change the equation, but it looks like the fix is in.

The power of insurance co.'s, drug companies and for-profit health care providers over Congress would be diminished if we had public campaign financing. Nothing will change until members of Congress care more about their constituents than their re-election coffers.

I worked in reproductive health care for many years of my life. I learned way back then, and it still applies that the only way people are moved to make change happen is when THEY are affected directly. Legislation will be considered and created to provide all Americans with quality health care when member of Congress truly experience what it is like NOT to have it. I suggest that since so many of our businesses and industries are dropping healthcare coverage to save themselves and to lower costs, that the Federal government follow suit. Let's remove health care as a "right" for members of Congress for the next 5 years and see if we can then get them to listen and consider single-payer health care for all Americans. Novel idea...but why not!? Donna

Not-For-Profit in the Arena of Needs

Why must a for-profit insurance company stand between a person’s health and medical needs and those prepared to provide the professional service? Why not administer the ‘insurance’ from a public (government) non-profit platform?

Who should profit from a person’s need for medical care or disability maintenance? Should anyone profit? Why should the gross-charge for medical care include a profit above and beyond the actual cost of production-distribution-administration and prorated training, design, and development and be a part of the economic model for the provision of our essential needs? Are food, water, energy, shelter, provisions for health/safety, and transportation essential need? Are these rights or privileges? Is survival of the fittest the our operating paradigm, or is compassion?

Specifically – health, medical, pharmaceutical, and prevention - businesses and services which comprise a 15 percent of our present GDP are essential to each individual’s life. Is the idea of profit for these services exploitive, if not a form of extortion? The brokers and middlemen that are now interjected between the consuming individual and the service provider/product should become unnecessary, with the improved levels of - communication, automation, and education – available today. Could an enlightened, educated, and responsible citizenry be self responsible for maintaining accountability for the efficacy of the administration of these services, and the acceptance of risk? Do we now have a model on the internet, AngiesList, that attempts to accomplish this? Is this not the place for litigation, but instead a place for the ‘free marketplace’ to weed-out, or entrust, where individuals’ actions to purchase and use are the judge and jury? If we and our educational institutions work correctly, we can dramatically improve our own oversight of medical care, and if we are individually conscientious, we can exercise higher levels of preventative medicine as well as preliminary diagnostics and even treatment prescription. If we individually fail to assume responsibility that fault lies individually with us. What defines a non-profit business? Who or what agencies monitor those not-for-profit businesses, define the policies appropriate of non-profits, and enforce those policies? Why would anyone want to establish and run a non-profit business? Could true not-for-profit health care related products and service significantly reduce the cost of health care? Or, on the other hand, are health care and the insurance management/access industries currently mainly operating as not-for-profit, thus making this argument moot? Is this truly and issue of individual responsibility, and if so how do we foster greater individual responsibility?

Another take of the problem of health care costs was developed by the CATO institute in 1994, in which the primary premise is the over-use of medical services because of ‘ease-of-access’ to the system. You can follow the link here to the article Cato Policy Analysis No. 211. In addition, Cato argues that ‘third-party’ payments (government/medicare/medicade, and insurance companies) are paying the bills, enabling the patient, and thus encouraging higher costs. Is it a combination of these observations? Are we trying to provide for the delivery of too much health care? What is too much? Too much for whom?

Last, how do these arguments relate to the other essential needs of food, water, energy, and shelter?

Note: I and my employers have paid insurance premiums in excess of $200,000 over my 40 year working career. I’ve never been hospitalized nor have I used more than $10,000 of coverage over my lifetime to this point. I have just retired, and now have to pay a COBRA premium of $800 a month for myself for the years between my age 63-65 for similar coverage, just myself. When I become eligible for MEDICARE, those premiums (all combined) will no longer apply to my future healthcare needs, they will belong to the insurance companies that no longer will provide for me, let alone my wife. Incidentally, my wife and her employers paid similar amounts into her health insurance plans. She has had more medical expenses than I, averaging about $1000 a year. Combined we will have paid in well over $450,000 to our private for-profit health insurance companies. I’m happy that others, less fortunate may benefit from our insurance (kind of like taxes), but I’m not please with corporate shareholders, and administrators, upper level corporate managers profiting off of my contributions. I might say the same for those selling pharmaceuticals, or medical supplies, or medical test equipment, or administering home healthcare, etc. I think my family would have done much better to have banked, on our own in a savings account our monthly medical insurance premiums. I might say that for all of our insurances (auto, boat, home, life, mortgage).

IT’S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THE WAY THE MEDICAL PROVIDERS CALCULATE THE BILL FOR THE UNINSURED. THIS IS OBSCENE, BUT NO ONE SEEMS TO BE AWARE OF IT.

Whenever people complain about the rising cost of health care, they are usually talking about the rising cost of the insurance premiums that are deducted from the paychecks of employees who have health care benefits. It seems that some people are having a difficult time paying the $30 - 50 dollar increase in their monthly premium. This is a problem the uninsured would like to have.

It seems that no one knows about the payment formula that the insurance companies force on the medical industry, or how it is applied to the uninsured.

Most of the major insurance companies have a contract with the medical providers (doctors, labs, and hospitals) to give them a reduced price for their services, which is typically about 65% of the ‘base’ price that is charged only to uninsured patients. Their contracts further stipulate that the insurance companies have to pay only 50% of the base price for the first charge on a given day, and 25% of the base price for the remaining charges for the same day, less the patient’s copay. This means that the insurance companies pay only 16 – 33 % of the base price less the patient’s copay. Thus, you can generally say they pay about 25% of the base price for any medical bill they get. This also means that whenever the doctors and hospitals want to raise their price to the insurance companies by $1, they have to raise the base price to the uninsured by $4.

To illustrate:

If a medical procedure "costs" $1200, the insurance company is only asked to pay $300 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $1200.

If a medical procedure "costs" $12,000, the insurance company is only asked to pay $3,000 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $12,000.

If a medical procedure "costs" $120,000, the insurance company is only asked to pay $30,000 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $120,000.

If a medical procedure "costs" $400,000, the insurance company is only asked to pay $100,000 on behalf of their insured patient, while the uninsured patient would be told to pay the full $400,000. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT THE INSURANCE COMPANY IS BILLED AND WHAT THE UNINSURED PATIENT IS BILLED IN THIS EXAMPLE IS $300,000!!! This happens every day. I've seen these bills myself.

It is my understanding that the actual cost of a medical procedure is closer to what the insurance companies pay, or 25% of the billed fee. The 75% “penalty” is what the uninsured get charged because they don't have insurance.

The most upsetting thing about rising health care costs is not that the insured patient’s deductible is rising, but that their insurance companies have forced the medical providers to charge the uninsured four times (400%) of what they, the multibillion dollar insurance companies, pay, on average. To make this possible, they have put forth the view that people who don’t have insurance are lazy, unskilled, stupid, or unwilling to contribute to an insurance plan. However, most of the uninsured are working, but their employers will not provide insurance. While they are busy convincing the public that the attitude of the uninsured is the problem, they have neglected to show the truth about what they are charging to private individuals for insurance. Their private insurance plans cost about $700 to $2,000 per month, while the typical uninsured worker earns only $1,200 to $2,400 per month before taxes. It’s very difficult, if not nearly impossible, to pay for food, housing, transportation, etc. with these wages, long before health care costs are added.

The majority of people who have health care provided by their employer would not be able to purchase health care if their employer stopped providing it. They are not "better" people than the uninsured. Where I live, jobs that pay $20,000 to $30,000 (with a growing number who have no medical insurance) per year are the norm, but the media gives you the impression that there are a lot of people who make much higher salaries, $50,000 - $100,000. Only those employed in the medical industry get the higher wages. There are very few people who can afford to purchase health care insurance without a subsidy from their employer; there are very few people who can afford to pay the grotesquely inflated medical expenses that are 400% higher than what the insurance companies pay. There is a war being waged by the medical industry against the uninsured. Any contact with a hospital will ruin their lives and destroy their families – bankruptcy, foreclosure, homelessness – it is virtually inevitable. The health care providers don’t care. They feel it’s their duty to charge these grotesque fees to the uninsured.

I have a pre-existing condition and am self employed. I was declined by every health insurance company licensed in the state... so 7 years ago, I sold everything and left the USA.

I now have UK-based private insurance (tho I do not live there) for $190/mo covering my wife and I everywhere in the world except the USA.

I'd like to be able to return home one day. For now, I am required to pay taxes to a country I may never set foot in again.

The Helena Independent Record the local Helena MT newspaper asks for news tips on its website.

I posted a tip about Baucus's refusal to acknowledge the overwhelming national support of a single payer health care system.

Maybe you can think of addtional tips for Sen Baucus's home newspaper.

Of course we need a national health plan and single payer is the way to go. The life span of the health insurance industry must be ended. Of course they will struggle until their last gasp.

A Challenge to Our Newspapers

Each city and village in this country should encourage their local paper to inform it's citizens to let congress and the president know that we the public want the 'single payer" plan for the health reform of this country.

Copy of email sent to Senator Baucaus this morning

"Dear soon to be ex-Senator Baucus

You have sold out your constituents and the rest of America by refusing to acknowledge the overwhelming national support for a single payer health care system.

You should be ashamed of yourself for the betrayal of the public good.

May you rot in hell."

Suggest you all write him also to express your opinion. Just google "baucus" to get his email.

Why have we been having this discussion for so many years? I think it's really time for a change. If the big health insurance companies and big Pharma don't see the handwriting on the wall--too bad. We're the only first-world nation which has an out-of-date health care system. Why? Because we have a for-profit system.

As your guests so eloquently stated, it's time for a movement in this country, and I believe that's happening now. There is a group on the web called Health Justice which is also fighting for a single-payer system. I think "Sicko" was the film which pointed out the various health care systems in other countries which were working fine and which we could probably model if we chose to do so--I'm not sure why Americans are so afraid of the Canadian system. But that's not the only model that's working.

What do we do next if we can't march on Washington like the brave nurses and doctors who chose to do so? Write to Congress. Call them. Join groups you know who support this kind of system. It makes sense.

I currently have employer-paid health insurance; that cost is $1200. per month for those who select the plan (Blue Shield). I have to pay half out of my pocket every month in order to be covered; I am a single person with no children. I am subsidizing those who select the same plan who have families. Is that fair?

Exactly Bill. Thank you. I want the same health care opportunities that our members of Congress currently enjoy for EVERYONE. I want to eliminate an insurance system that does not insure.I want access for all. How can those elected folks possibly support this cumbersome, scary and dangerous mess that exists for the majority of our citizens?

Health insurance is not the same as health care. Insurance is for accidents.
For those who are fearful of the dirty word “socialism”, why are they not concerned about the fact that we the taxpayers are bailing out Wall Street and the banksters with trillions and counting, (which is corporate socialism) with no strings attached?
Obama has said that Single Payer would be the best approach if we “were starting from scratch”. By removing the age restrictions and expanding and improving Medicare to include all Americans, we could have a truly unique American health care system.

The same special interests that have given us the most expensive, poorest quality health care among developed countries (37th rank) are now suddenly pretending to be champions of reform. Their legislative agenda is a patent effort to stop the public demand for a meaningful universal health care system through a Single Payer- Medicare For All. The fact that over a million Americans face bankruptcy every year due to medical debt- even though the majority had insurance at the time when they got sick is ignored, as are the needs of the American people. The recent decision to close thousands of auto dealerships as part of the neo-liberal IMF/World bank austerity/structural adjustment style programs that are being shoved down our throats by the “change” Obama administration, are in effect costing the American taxpayer tens of thousands of more lost jobs, health insurance, housing, Social Security, etc. Structural Adjustment programs that have been used to impoverish developing countries throughout the world, are now being implemented here in the US, and the health care “reform” is a glaring example.

The single-payer solution is the one solution that reduces costs and increases savings, covers every American, provides patient choice, and allows doctors and patients to make the best medical decisions. It would also provide a huge stimulus to the economy by creating millions of jobs. Obama's May 11 announcement that insurance companies, pharmaceutical manufacturers, the American Hospital Association, the AMA, and other groups intend to reduce the growth of health care costs by 1.5 percent over ten years, is simply a ploy to block meaningful health care reform, in particular the possibility of a Single Payer- Medicare for All. See: The Health Care Industry's PR Scam: Will Obama Fall for It? — By James Ridgeway. Single Payer would reduce health care spending in the US by as much as one third, cutting costs dramatically for working Americans. Single-Payer would also replace employer-based health care benefits, removing a severe financial burden on businesses suffering from the crippling economic collapse. The 'options' plans favored by many Democrats are designed to sustain for-profit insurance companies through massive taxpayer-funded subsidies or mandates. Single-Payer removes the private insurance-HMO industry from the system altogether, making health care a right for all Americans.The current health care crisis is a direct result of the Clinton era so-called reform which fundamentally solidified the for profit health insurance monopoly. The idea of managed care that Clinton promoted has been an utter failure. Be aware, that the same forces are at work now in pursuit of a public option which continues to keep the status quo, just like the managed care has done. Without removing the insurance/HMOs from the equation there will be no cost containment, or genuine health care reform. We need to get rid of the parasitic health insurance monopoly, and not make this another bailout for the corporations. Single Payer is the only real solution.
It was mentioned on Bill Moyers (May 22- PBS) that Arnold vetoed Single Payer twice. However, it is crucial to point out that the bill would have saved the state an estimated $14 billion per year, enough to erase the state debt within two years AND cover everyone far more reliably and comprehensively than they are now. Instead Arnold substituted a sham plan of his own that would have fed the BEAST THAT IS THE PROBLEM and cost (not saved) an additional $12-14 Billion.
The failing California economy rests firmly on the shoulders of Arnold’s refusal to sign Single Payer into law. That is a fact. We need Single Payer, nothing less.

I'm very angry at the Obama Administration for excluding the single payer option from the discussions. I firmly believe it is the only real reform.I intend to keep sending e-mails and writing letters expressing my opinion.

The bottom line in my opinion is..."doing the right thing" we seem to be more upset, judged by the media cover, over torture that happened 5-6 years ago than the torture sick and uninsured people endure everday. How much money would the country and government save if people could stay healthy from seeing doctors in a timely manner instead of when they are so ill they have no choice and many of their health problems could have been taken care of earlier and cheaper. We as the people are the only ones that can make this happen.

Oh my.

I have had 2 posts censored (AKA deleted)in this forum.

It is time to meet my Hero in person and ask him why?

Anything but Single Payer is Phony Reform that won't work.

Supporting compromised reform from the start is actually the diversion to steer us away from the real reform. And in real world negotiations, you NEVER go in asking for less than you want. You ask for MORE. But more important is how can any real and fair solution come out of negotiations that don’t allow all sides to be heard? It is quite frankly, un-American to deny the Single Payer advocates an equal opportunity to make their case.

Why don’t those who claim to support a public plan not use their resources to help explain Single Payer? Why are you helping to push a compromised plan that keeps the insurance industry middlemen at the table to continue to suck out over 1/3 of our health care dollars? When explained clearly, Single Payer is clearly the best choice. Without a true Single Payer system, the public option will fail and the insurance companies know it just as well as Obama does. Their phony grumbling and offer to save 1.5% in costs per year is disgusting, but it is even more disheartening to see good people and good organizations pretend to favor health care reform by saying they support a “public” option. A Single Payer plan is already in the form of a bill in Congress and has 93 co-sponsors. So, why are we not discussing HR676 and what it will do to cover everyone and save money?

Opponents of reform are proving they will attack ANY change as “socialized” medicine, even “change” that keeps private insurance in business and growing. So why don’t we work to set the record straight? The insurance industry has controlled our healthcare system far too long and led us to where we are today. Why is Obama (who I voted for) allowing them to control the debate on healthcare reform? Is it because he was the largest recipient of campaign contributions from the insurance industry and pharmaceutical industry (as Senator and Presidential Candidate)?

Why, when Obama does have the support of the public now to do the right thing, is he cowering behind Max Baucus? The fact that not ONE person knowledgeable about Single Payer has been included in the discussions and advocates for Single Payer, including doctors, were arrested for attempting to be included at a table where all the insurance industry representatives were seated is unconscionable. When citizens are silenced in favor of corporate interest, this is not, “Yes, we can” or “change from the bottom up” much less a democracy.

I am encouraged to see how many people have commented to this blog since last evening.

If nothing else, we must express ourselves clearly so that the President does not assume we are supporting so called "health care reform" which is of little value..Or, worse, it would be a "change" to try and deceive people into believing something good has just been accomplished. We must not be fooled.

The June 6th Obama "kickoff" for the People to show their support for his plan (whatever it is) is the opportunity to PROTEST, not to cheer for yet another political magic act.

"Because of the need to be re-elected, politicians are always likely to have a short-term bias. What looks good now is more important to politicians than long-term consequences even when those consequences can be easily foreseen..."
from the John Steele Gordon quotation above

At this point in our country's history, it seems to me that our economic system has been shown to be fatally flawed by a bias toward short-term profit. Furthermore, as far as I can tell, the economic "long-term" has typically been understood to be only about a generation. Considering the vast future that is at stake, I am certain we can expect the hole to get much deeper if we leave matters to traditional thinkers in politics or economics.

Unfortunately, the real solutions have serious costs in the transition period. Such costs are the proverbial "devil we don't know," so it seems very difficult for widespread support to gain momentum. In the case of single-payer, what will happen to all those employed by the private insurance industry and in hospitals who will no longer be needed? And what impact would the relatively sudden loss of these insurance companies have on the struggling financial sector? I hope someone much smarter and more informed than I am has answers to these questions so that our leaders can find a way to support a real solution. Like Katherine Benziger (who posted earlier), I'd like to know what I can do from here.

I was disappointed that Bill Moyer did not get other views on the single-payer episode.

Why does Moyer keep his shows so one sided? That's no better than the politicians and media that he complains about. Why not invite someone like Dr. Ron Paul? Read Paul's recommendation for health care reform @ http://www.house.gov/apps/list/speech/tx14_paul/HCRA.shtml

Many others besides Paul could also provide dissenting views. PLEASE GIVE US BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUES.

Obama has shocked me, frankly. He pulled a good one on us - he has no intention of saving America from the concentration of money "at the top" and is willing to let more people die, daily in fact, than listen to "we the people."
Single payer is the only way to provide care for our citizens.
I've witnessed what AARP, and other "health" insurance programs have done to the seniors in AZ - removing them from original Medicare so they cannot see the few qualified MDs in the state (there are no internal medicine blokes there to speak of - they all march into Texas for it's abominal Tort Reform). AARP, and the insurance companies, along with the POTUS, and all elected in DC should be hung at dawn.

I think we have had just about enough. Agree: we will have to take to the streets en masse to be heard because the FCC has sewn up all communications. We must inform one another.

On Sidney Wolf, and on PFSP, and Bill Moyers for helping to keep America's voice heard.

"...only the profit motive and competition keep enterprises lean, efficient, innovative and customer-oriented.”

Just a hunch, but I'm thinking John Steele Gordon hasn't seen a doctor since he and his mom were in the maternity ward of their local hospital.

Sue J May23 9:33AM so you are now HOPING for CHANGE-wasn't that promised in the campaign? Good points on health ins.

Mac may 23 5:33am few words, BIG points

Shelia B may23 2:45am good pts. & personal experience.

Tom W. may23 1:36am without action by voters all that is left is jaw flapping.

rd may23 12:24am Interesting--Why not?

Vote out the Congressional Zombies Nov 2010!

A CAN-DO Party needs to be formed in each state to vote out the Can-Not- partiesssss!

Goals need to be set--
Details need to be debated-
Money IN & OUT needs to be planned & a flat-ish tax might be debated.

How much could Taxpayers save without IRS, CPAs Lawyers, and Congressional committies that GIVE our money away without knowung where it goes!!!

Vote out the Zombirs!!!

Billy Bob, Florida where the Zombies made a law allowing a party to deny my vote AND did away with usuray laws!

The poll should have also asked "Do you favor single payer? since Pres. Obama's plan is not quite the same thing. Thanks for airing this important message. I too am disappointed in the lack of clarity in motivations of some of the congressional representatives. Follow the money.

I'm disappointed after vigorously supporting Obama and my new Congressman. They campaigned on change and brought us more of the same, elected officials advocating for the corporate interests instead of the public need. Congressman Conyers (HR 676) and Senator Bernie Sanders (S703) together with Bill Moyers, Dr. Wolf and Dr. Himmelstein are courageous heroes. Maybe this show can stop the "healthcare debate" from being "de bait and switch". Chairman Max Baucus has prevented the single-payer option from being discussed while allowing the profiteers to dominate and his future campaign fund is probably growing as a result.

Single-payer healthcare should be part of a robust debate on healthcare, anything else is undemocratic. A full discussion of the future of health care in America can't take place if all credible potential solutions aren't examined and the financial burden for the taxpayers is known. When the ranks of the uninsured are growing; when veterans and their families lack healthcare, when major industries like automakers are folding in part due to the burden of providing healthcare for employees and retirees, when Americans are poised for change and the party that promised it is in power - then when?

Cost is only part of the problem because coverage is denied for the uninsurable with chronic conditions who are shut out of the for profit system. It's also about access to care. Expand Medicare to cover all. Get the insurance company profiteers out of our pockets. Our inhumane system is an international disgrace and I'm ashamed of it. It would be satisfying to know that my tax dollars are providing a genuine public benefit. I’ll believe government can’t solve this when the members of the senate and congress give up their government healthcare system! How stupid do they think we are?

The taxpayers are always burdened with the costs of decisions by our elected officials but the beneficiaries of our tax revenue are; military industrial complex, financial industrial complex and medical industrial complex who receive the corporate welfare and give some back in campaign financing funds. They tell us that it isn't politically feasible right now but we were told that electing a black president was not politically feasible and we elected him anyway based on "hope" and "change". Please let the taxpayers have something besides war and corruption! I hope your program can help us avoid an apartheid system with inferior care for the poor, elderly and chronically ill. Thank you again.

In all this discussion there's still no mention of the monopoly held by "traditional" medicine. If you truly want to bring down costs and provide better health care there should be the option to choose "alternative" care. My primary care giver is an Ayurvedic physician. Less costly than an M.D. and much healthier given the fact that M.D.'s dispense drugs like candy.

At this point I feel I want to read all of the blog entries before I say much. But when Bill Moyers finished talking with Dr. David Kimmelstein and his colleague and Donna Smith I found myself saddened and shocked. I am self employed for 30 years and cannot afford health care. At 61 almost 62 this is more and more of a problem. I was an early and passionate Obama supporter, but have been very confused by his walking away from health care. I thought I was not hearing it correctly when I heard what was happening and heard what Olympia Snow had said. But this program and sharing with these professionals means I did get it right. Obama is walking away from truly solving the problem. I have been saddened to realize that he is not helping me at all and that I am not alone. I want very much to find a way to act with others so bring this to the attention of the Congress who themselves are not being asked to deliver. I know when we were organizing with MoveOn.org many years ago and in the past few years with all the environmental groups we do massive calling and writing organized so that the numbers are understood. So it seems me to a national calling and writing campaign could begin immediately. I will call. But it needs a massive calling which is being tallied and monitored by the press so that it is reported. I would like to be part of that. Maybe MoveOn will help also. It is very sad to realize that we have to do this. But I don’t want to sit back and then be hit with the sad news that our health care system has not been healed! Yes Winston Churchill did say that America in the end did the right thing. So let’s get more people on the job. What more can I do to help from here?

National healthcare should be considered, is feasible by being paid for with taxes from companies who send their businesses to other countries and FICA and by regulating costs. And we could still have choices such as two National Programs depending on how much you want to pay in FICA and by still having secondary private insurance if you want to pay for it. Sounds perfect to me. It would cover all the people in "tent cities", the homeless, students, everybody. That's how I'd do it. And they can call it Socialism or anything else they want. Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me.

PS. I just fired off emails to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Sen. Barbara Boxer, Nancy Pelosi, and one to the whitehouse.gov site to the president.

Figured that's the least I can do.

I have to admit just saw the final 5 minutes of the show, but the rest is on tape and I'm going to get to it. But I have been thinking about just this issue.

I saw my dr. yesterday (something I do as rarely as possible), and she is very dedicated and respected in her field.

She and I are both upset that single payer health care is off the table.

If Taiwan has single payer, why can't we have it? Anything else not only is a bad idea, it won't work. We have to get the profit out of medicine. Let the doctors make a fair living without devoting their lives to filling out paperwork and 15 minute (or less) visits. Let patients have medical care.

Sorry, I don't care how much Big Pharma and AARP and the insurance companies give to those on Capitol Hill, but they have to be cut out of this.

This is a question of giving people basic medical care. Universal health, single-payer, is the only way to go.

I know more than one MD (including two of my cousins), who have left practicing medicine because it is basically such a pain in the butt these days. Actually, one cousin practices, still, but as a university in Student Health. Maybe things are a bit less regimented there.

Thank you, that's my 2 cents on the subject.

Finally, I'm in the WLA area. Is there any group where liberal minded Bill Moyers fans (and generally well informed people ;-) meet up for evening discussions? I'd sure enjoy that. I'll give my email if anyone has info:
capkelly@gmail.com.

Thanks!

Something not mentioned:
Why should the rich (Wall Street) get richer at the expense of the poor?
Those who can't afford insurance get seen in Emergency Rooms (by law) and who picks up that tab? ERs just close up.
Start up 'Single Payer' then let individuals and companies choose where to insure people. This should eventually drive Insurance companies out of business

Thanks again,Bill, for amazingly comprehensive coverage/"investigative reporting" of an extremely important issue ignored by journalism in general. Your guests were passionate, intelligent, and very well-informed--as they educate us as to the only wise, truly practical and humane (now-neglected) option of single-payer universal national health care insurance with citizens having continuing freedom to choose their private doctors and hospitals! Another truly great,important issue of the Moyer's Journal.
I'd like to see the written results of a canvas of all 100 Senators and 435 Representatives asking the following: "Congressman (or woman), If you knew a majority of the American people were strongly FOR a single-payer national insurance plan covering all Americans, along with a majority of the doctors and nurses in the nation, which would also free American businesses to compete globally on a more level playing field with foreign firms and industries, while honoring citizens’ continuing freedom to choose their private doctors and hospitals, would you vote for it?
(Canvas all and each 100 Senators and 435 members of the House of Representatives and report their exact answers.)]
Does anyone know how to go about "pulling that off?" A variation would be, "What PER CENTAGE of the American people would have to be for "single-payer" for you to vote for such a bill?
Thanks to all program participants and also to all of you viewers who share such passionately-held, informed opinions and insights with us!

America presently has a model for single payer which hasn't been mentioned. All public sector employees have great health care paid for by me: the taxpayer. It's the private sector worker who pays twice. We pay the public sectors full coverage, low deductibles, low premium plan, and still have to pay for our inadequate, high deductible, high premium plan. I want and deserve what every city, state, federal worker, or member of congress has: a comprehensive healthcare plan for me and my and family.

America presently has a model for single payer which hasn't been mentioned. All public sector employees have great health care paid for by me: the taxpayer. It's the private sector worker who pays twice. We pay the public sectors full coverage, low deductibles, low premium plan, and still have to pay for our inadequate, high deductible, high premium plan. I want and deserve what every city, state, federal worker, or member of congress has: a comprehensive healthcare plan for me and my and family.

I didn't really need any more evidence that Barack Obama was a "captured" political figure (See "Bailouts of Wall Street") but I received it tonight anyway.

Listening to Senator "O" proclaim his support for a single-payer system in some idyllic Democrat controlled future reminded me of the 2006 election promises of Pelosi & Reid in which the Iraqi quagmire would be ameliorated with Dem control....
It's all Kabuki. Our political "system" resembles team sports more than anything else

I'm afraid now to find at age 50, that the cynics were right. Right or Left, our politicians ARE all alike.

America IS and has become a fascist oligarchy with our political actors captured by Industry.

Our remedy seems to belong to a far off age of muskets, enlightenment and courage. But to us, real change will not come i'm afraid until the country is in pieces.

Bill Moyers,

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!
When Congress ignores us, the media ignores us, Bill Moyers listens!

The American people want Single Payer Healthcare!

I so admire those nurses and doctors who are following their convictions and speaking out on our behalf.

I recently joined a group of 30 or so people in my community who decided to advocate for Single Payer. It is a group of regular folks: nurses, teachers, retirees. All of us in one way or another have seen the people we care about struggle when it comes to paying for healthcare or getting the care they need.

We were getting discouraged when we saw how out of touch Congress is with what we need and how they seemed not to care at all, to only be interested in the agendas of the rich and powerful. That is not what I thought our country was about, or what the Democratic party was about.

Single payer makes sense for both the conservative and the progressive. Single payer is the most fiscally sound, will be less costly overall, and will free private businesses, especially small businesses to be more profi