|
Feedback ForumNOW wants to hear from you! Send us your opinions, reactions and ideas about "Health Care Meltdown: Looking for SolutionsSubmissions for this question are no longer being accepted. Previously submitted comments appear below. Comments may have been edited for content or space. Poster: Robert Baillie Comment: I hate to say this because NOW is one of the two best programs on TV. However, the April 18 show on health care in Pennsylvania was a huge disappointment. There is a single payer bill (HB 1660) in the legislature with 37 co-sponsors in the House alone. Yet not a single word was said about any plan other than the Governor's proposal. The single-payer proposal was not even mentioned. What gives? Didn't NOW's investigators know about the single-payer bill? Why was the so-called market-based solution the only one discussed? I would have hoped that you people in the media would be willing to let the American people hear all sides of this life and death issue. Robert Baillie Poster: Ever Rodriguez Comment: Congratulations. Great job! I only wish the program would run a bit earlier. I live in the San Francisco Bay Area and I have to wait until 11p.m. to see your program. I wish the American public could have programs like this shown during more accessible times. But thank you anyway! And keep up the good work. Sincerely, Ever Rodriguez Poster: Thomas R. Olmsted, M.D. Comment: Incredible that once again the only physician candidate for president, was not given a single line in this debate. Dr. Paul has practical and reasonable plans for solving this crisis. I am past being outraged that he is given such short shrift. Shame on you! Thomas R. Olmsted, M.D. Abingdon, Virginia Poster: dave gerold Comment: The graph used in the 4/18 health care piece is misleading. I agree with the point that health care costs have increased faster than wages, but the scales on the graph for wages and costs were not the same. It misleadingly overemphasized the cost increase vs. wages. I agree with the thesis, and I want NOW to remain credible. This sort of graph is exactly the sort of thing opponents can seize upon as misleading. A graph implies you are accurately displaying facts, and when you overemphasize a point by distorting the graph, you have left good faith behind and have entered spin. Please keep NOW's credibility intact and use graphs properly, even if other people do not. Here is the transcript of speech behind the graph I'm talking about: ...Over the last decade. To start, the typical wage was $28,548 dollars a year and the average yearly premium for health insurance back then was about $2200 a person. Since then, the cost of insurance has more than doubled to about $5000 a year, wages? Not so much. ... |
Who's Helping Our Wounded Vets?
Elizabeth Warren on the Economy
Nurses Needed
Electric Car Dreams
PBS Special Report: Health Care Reform
