COMMENTS: 52
Pushing the Single-Payer Solution
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Personal Health headlines via email.
He told me in a recent interview: "Here I am, a Republican, thinking about nationalizing health care. It just went against the grain of everything that I stood for. But you have to remember: I didn't come to those conclusions with lofty ideals of social justice."
In the early 1990s, his medical group started falling apart. White, a keen student of economics and the business of medicine, determined that it wasn't just his practice but the system that was broken.
"You're seeing an ever-increasing number of people starting to support a national health program. In fact, 59 percent of practicing physicians today believe that we need to have a national health program. I mean, that's unheard of, even 10 years ago. It's amazing to see a new generation of physicians coming up who are disgusted with our current health-care system. You know, we're trained to be advocates of patients, we're trained to save lives, we're trained to practice medicine. And instead, what we're doing is we're practicing Wall Street economics."
Single-payer is not to be confused with universal coverage, which Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both support. In fact, in a recent debate, when Clinton raised the issue of single-payer, the audience interrupted with applause. She immediately countered, "I know a lot of people favor [it], but for many reasons [it] is difficult to achieve."
Why? One of the most powerful industries in the country opposes it -- the insurance industry. Under universal coverage, insurance profits are preserved. Under single-payer, they are not. Dr. Rocky White, who now sits on the board of the nonprofit Health Care for All Colorado, has switched his political affiliation. He also has updated and reissued Dr. Robert LeBow's book on single-payer called Health Care Meltdown: Confronting the Myths and Fixing Our Failing System.
He described possible solutions: "There are a lot of different types of single-payer systems -- you could have purely socialized medicine. That's kind of like what England has. The government owns the hospitals, the government owns the clinics, the government finances all the health care, and all the doctors work for the government. That is truly socialized medicine, as opposed to the Canadian system, where the financing comes through their Medicare program, but all the doctors are in private practice."
The economics are complex, but this plain-spoken country doctor explains it clearly:
"You know, this industry is a $2-trillion industry, and the profits in the for-profit insurance industry are so huge and it's so deeply entrenched into Wall Street ... but until we move to a single-payer system and get rid of the profit motive in financing of health care, we will not be able to fix the problems that we have."
What would it take? Dr. White has spent his life dealing with the high winds on the high plains, from Nebraska to Colorado, and describes the challenge the country faces in familiar terms:
"I think that our current presidential candidates understand that ideally single-payer would be the best, but they don't have the political will to move that forward. Their job is to feel which way the wind is blowing. Our job is to turn that wind."
Stay up to date with the latest Personal Health headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 24, 2008 1:12 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who are we going to pay to make it all okay? If we pay together under the guise of government, it is "single payer." If not, it is individual payer - but regardless, the same health care firms are the ones raking it in.
What we need is a nationalized basic health care system - not a single-payer system. That's just repeating the talking points put out by the current campaigns - but none of the candidates has the guts to buck the powerful pharmaceutical lobby.
Just look at the Canadian, French or British health care systems. They put an emphasis on preventative care because it is in their best interest to keep their costs low. That's what we need in the U.S.
Single payer is just a Trojan Horse for business as usual. What we really need is public health care.
P.S. Why doesn't Democracy Now have a comment section on its website, like most other media outlets are starting to do these days. Democracy Now, remember, technically is part of the non-profit corporate media world...
I've actually tried to raise this matter before, and have gotten no response. I think Democracy Now, as a pro-democracy website dedicated to public participation in government (right?), should allow the public to post comments.
Is it because people might post comments like this?
In particular, your coverage of the "Recreate '68 campaign" was atrocious. You didn't go into the shady background of your guest, which could have been discovered in a second. You also did not go into the role that COINTELPRO and CHAOS played as agent provocateurs at the 1968 Chicago convention - a really bogus piece of crap, that was.
Basically, the refusal of DN! to allow a comments section is starting to look more and more suspicious - maybe they are just as dedicated to controlling the message as the New York Times is?
The alternate media, the corporate media, the mainstream media - it really is all just a blur with no clear borders or separating lines, always subject to manipulation and control by external forces.
Best learn to think for yourselves, and don't trust "leaders", even if they say you should. Go with your instinctive feelings - if it seems shady, it very well might be.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I am with you on this one, thought criminal..... and I would go a step further...
Posted by: Prophit
» Wow! Support from A 911truthiness nut! It's like being given a Turd Blossom...
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: Wow! Support from A 911truthiness nut! It's like being given a Turd Blossom...
Posted by: greenthumb
» Single-payer still better than the HMOs but not a final solution
Posted by: Lector
» RE: Single-payer still better than the HMOs but not a final solution
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 24, 2008 1:14 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
WTF?
Hearst Entertainment & Syndication, one of the main operating units of The Hearst Corporation, includes Hearst's stakes in various cable TV networks, such as ESPN, Lifetime, A&E, and The History Channel. The unit also has television programming activities, producing documentary and reality shows such as The History Channel's Modern Marvels series. In addition, Hearst Entertainment & Syndication houses King Features Syndicate, a distributor of comics and columns to newspapers. Its Reed Brennan Media Associates subsidiary provides production support and editing services for newspapers.
Okay - so Amy Goodman IS the corporate media! Gosh, it took me long enough to figure that out...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: P.S. is Amy Goodman really writing for Hearst Communications?
Posted by: mmckinl
» you don't find it odd?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: P.S. is Amy Goodman really writing for Hearst Communications?
Posted by: Midway54
» Do you know who Hearst Communications is?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» I fear its time to be questioning everyone now. Many have sold out.....
Posted by: Prophit
» Look, 911 Truthiness troll - don't play silly games.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mmckinl on Apr 25, 2008 1:30 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is time for Progressives and Liberals to demand what is right, and in this case actually less expensive and more efficient. The time is past for compromise and defeat on public issues without an all out war for the Common Good.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I was hoping for an explanation of how the Fed sets health policy in the U.S. . .
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: I was hoping for an explanation of how the Fed sets health policy in the U.S. . .
Posted by: mmckinl
» RE: I was hoping for an explanation of how the Fed sets health policy in the U.S. . .
Posted by: greenthumb
Comments are closed-
Posted by: drricklippin on Apr 25, 2008 5:23 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is my plan which Hillary liked in 1995
GROW UP AMERICA-A HEALTH CARE PLAN FOR ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS*
-Stop prolonging death. It’s both expensive and dehumanizing at best, greedy and cruel at worst.
-Empower US citizens to assume increased individual responsibility for health and convince medical consumers that it is in their best interests not to assume the role of helpless, dependent victims/patients.
-Yet also recognize that we have medicalized America’s social problems. So we must provide healthy and safe jobs for all able citizens thereby reducing poverty and all its subsequent health impacts (possibly 1/3rd of health care costs)
-Provide healthy environments including healthy air, water, soil and food.
-Rebuild America’s public health infrastructure to ensure we provide appropriate macro and individual interventions to especially low income citizens such as childhood and adult immunizations and response to man-made and natural catastrophes.
-Face the reality that a very large percentage of illnesses, injuries and hospitalizations are entirely preventable. Subsequently, the elimination of tobacco, alcohol, drug, medication and dietary abuse alone could immediately reduce medical costs by a factor of at least fifty percent.
-Incent and train physicians to maintain the health of patients and populations. Radical changes in provider re-imbursement and medical education strategies are necessary
-Recognize that early childhood preventive medical education can profoundly affect lifelong health behaviors.
*proposed in June of 1995
Revised January 2006/2007
Dr. Rick Lippin
Southampton,Pa
http://medicalcrises.blogspot.com
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I'm usually not afraid of single-payer, universal, or even socialized medicine, BUT:
Posted by: rickiey
» But Rick - you'll lower the GDP, and that's bad for everyone!
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: But Rick - you'll lower the GDP, and that's bad for everyone!
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
» RE: Friedman's a has-been...
Posted by: carcinoid112
» RE: Friedman's a has-been...
Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: Friedman's a has-been... those of us in health care will be OK
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
» RE: Friedman's a has-been... those of us in health care will be OK
Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: Friedman's a has-been... those of us in health care will be OK
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
» A single-payer system will be a HUGE savings on GDP...
Posted by: Bearzerker
» RE: A single-payer system will be a HUGE savings on GDP...
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Purple Girl on Apr 25, 2008 5:33 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sausage on Apr 25, 2008 6:15 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sirota quote's the most damning evidence from The Hill story:"Congressional Democrats are backing away from healthcare reform promises made by their two presidential candidates, saying that even if their party controls the White House and Congress, sweeping change will be difficult...Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), a member of Senate Democratic leadership and a key Hillary Clinton ally who also sits on the Finance Committee, said he is 'not sure we have the big plan on healthcare.'...'Healthcare I feel strongly about, but I am not sure that we're ready for a major national healthcare plan,' Schumer said...Rep. Kendrick Meek (D-Fla.), a Clinton supporter who sits on the House Ways and Means Committee, said "the money is not necessarily there right now" to enact the plans."
I also speculate that Hillary Clinton's call for mandatory ownership of healthcare insurance by every able-bodied American is a potential deal killer. And she knows it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 25, 2008 7:11 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And I'm still waiting for a response from Amy Goodman and Democracy Now as to why they don't allow the public to post any comments on their stories.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» They don't allow comments on their stories because.....
Posted by: Prophit
» RE: I think that this article shows a rather simple truth:
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Prophit on Apr 25, 2008 7:52 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't want to use it, support it or pay for it. would I still control what happens to my body??? Or do I submit to the state controlled by the elite????
Imagine Dick Cheney in charge of health care for Americans..... I mean, people, come on use your head. He is heartless and cruel and evil and he would be in charge to do what???? experiments??? make us sick???? die early when we are not productive???? I am trying to imagine a system controlled by Dick Cheney since that is what you all are advocating.
BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU ASK FOR, YOU JUST MIGHT GET IT. Remember, health care in the prison system is already under control of the government and look what they are doing to our prisoners???? They are using them for medical experimentations and also to our military. We have literally had soldiers die from thsoe experiments. I don't want gov control of anything that affects my right to live. Thanks but no thanks.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» The loonie-libertarian, right squeeks
Posted by: sausage
» RE: The loonie-libertarian, right squeeks
Posted by: willymack
» RE: Whatever happened to our innate right to choose????
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rsmohio on Apr 25, 2008 8:34 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Andie927 on Apr 25, 2008 9:59 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This means you pick your doctor, go to a clinic, or emergency room, get the care 'Your Doctor' thinks is best (verses our system where an Insurance Bean-Counter decides what care the doctor can give you). There's only ONE Billing System, like Medicare! Yes, preventive care is encouraged to keep costs down.
What the Green Party promotes is Single-Payer Non-Profit, meaning that the hospitals, clinics, ect. can not 'make a profit off sick people'. The Doctors would still make a very good salary, and the nurses, even the hospital administrators, what they can't do is make 3.1 Billion a year, off the illness of others!
Personal responsiblity only goes so far! The environment you live in, the type of work you do, the quality of food you can afford to buy, and the genes you inherite also have an effect on your health! Before you put all the Blame for high health care costs on 'irresponsible individuals' that smoke &/or drink, there's a whole field of medicine dedicated to SPORTS Medicine! Jogger's with bad knees, and tennis elbow, are you going to tell everyone to stop all of these kind of injury prone behaviors to stop too??
We, as a Nation rank very low on the totum pole 28th & 38th ?, for health outcomes, while spending more then twice as much!
There's obviously a lot of room for improvement! Openingup our Medical Schools, to ALL qualified American students (the Federal Gov. already subsidizes them) would be a start! Removing the 'PROFIT FACTOR' from healthcare, for Essential Medical Care, would be another. When a new drug is discovered, by grant money thru the NIH, that drug should be available, at a reduced cost!
What is stopping any of these Common Sense changes? Corporate Greed!!Dems. and Repugs. both being in the pockets of Lobbyists, and Doners! The solution: Public Campaign Finance!
OR better yet: The Green Party! That doesn't take Corporate Donations, that is slowly building a substancial party, 85 members currently hold office, and 1000 candidates running, Everyone of them support the Party Platform, Single-Payer Non-Profit HealthCARE!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: willymack on Apr 25, 2008 11:11 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: westomoon on Apr 25, 2008 12:37 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Amy's point was that the political winds oppose this. I've thought long & hard about it, and realized that no candidate can propose single-payer during an election -- there is just too much money being thrown at the issue by the insurance, pharma, and for-profit health industries. It will have to come after the candidate is in office. That has ended up being one of the reasons I support Barack Obama -- I think, with him (and with some really good new D Senators and Representatives from the upcoming elections), there's a chance we might get it.
Mr. McCain obviously will not be a route to a rational national health plan. Mrs. Clinton has deep roots in the healthcare question, and they come nowhere near the single-payer option. Aside from the tremendous money she has gotten from the industries that profit from our current system, she also has substantial ego involvement in her health-care plan of 1993, a deluxe buffet for the insurance industry with absolutely no government regulation of costs, profits, availability, or anything else. And we have seen how hard it is for her to admit any action of hers might have been wrong -- I don't think there's a snowball's chance she will ever support a single-payer system.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Politics of It
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Rosasharn on Apr 25, 2008 2:47 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: greenthumb on Apr 25, 2008 9:41 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are growing and learning.Next we need to demand more from our politicians and hold their feet to the fire.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: DaBear on Apr 25, 2008 11:54 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
god dammit if you actually like health care in the US (paying 50% of your pay to insurance companies, letting HMOs decide for you when you breathe, eat, shit and copulate copays that bankrupt a body after one hospital stay) fine, enjoy it, but you're still a fucking moron for loving that batshit excuse for health care.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Single Payer does not mean govt run/managed...Prophit
Posted by: DaBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: oxheadone on Apr 26, 2008 6:57 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: PJAW on Apr 27, 2008 7:46 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unfortunately, in today's political context, the misread headline was not that shocking to me.
Sheesh...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Liberty G on Apr 27, 2008 5:27 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The bottom line is that our "health care" system is a monopoly of the pharmaceutical and high tech/surgery peddlers.
The bottom line is that in most countries in the world, many alternative and holistic and traditional and herbal modalities are employed - at great savings and producing far better health results.
Just saying the government should hold the purse strings instead of the health insurance companies isn't enough change to really make a difference. In fact, it just creates another monopoly. If you don't agree with what they say is the care you should have, tough!
Britain, by contrast, has five homeopathic hospitals covered by national health, along with many other alternative medicine options. Germany has for years paid for all natural remedies found by their Commission E research to be effective and safe. The majority of health care in the world is NOT allopathic drugs and surgery!
Whoever pays, we need to have more and more moderately priced treatment choices available.
And, by the way, a huge improvement in our national health picture would occur if we took seriously the chemical stew in which we are living - not just outdoor air pollution, but the products we buy and the chemicals from them that wind up in the water we drink - along with the pesticide, hormone and antibiotic residues in our food.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Apr 28, 2008 10:14 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Did anyone see the Frontline on PBS series on this it covered 5-6 other industrialized nations who all do this and better and much much cheaper than the United States..!
Obama Clinton are talking about Insurance not coverage or Heath Care..
They're in the insurance companies pockets..!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: 2cynical on Apr 29, 2008 12:57 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pdxstudent on May 1, 2008 6:41 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now it's time? How about six months ago when there were still candidates, like Dennis Kucinich, offering these kinds of things and more?
I'm sorry, you shoot yourself in the foot and you're going to bleed.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 24, 2008 1:12 PM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who are we going to pay to make it all okay? If we pay together under the guise of government, it is "single payer." If not, it is individual payer - but regardless, the same health care firms are the ones raking it in.
What we need is a nationalized basic health care system - not a single-payer system. That's just repeating the talking points put out by the current campaigns - but none of the candidates has the guts to buck the powerful pharmaceutical lobby.
Just look at the Canadian, French or British health care systems. They put an emphasis on preventative care because it is in their best interest to keep their costs low. That's what we need in the U.S.
Single payer is just a Trojan Horse for business as usual. What we really need is public health care.
P.S. Why doesn't Democracy Now have a comment section on its website, like most other media outlets are starting to do these days. Democracy Now, remember, technically is part of the non-profit corporate media world...
I've actually tried to raise this matter before, and have gotten no response. I think Democracy Now, as a pro-democracy website dedicated to public participation in government (right?), should allow the public to post comments.
Is it because people might post comments like this?
In particular, your coverage of the "Recreate '68 campaign" was atrocious. You didn't go into the shady background of your guest, which could have been discovered in a second. You also did not go into the role that COINTELPRO and CHAOS played as agent provocateurs at the 1968 Chicago convention - a really bogus piece of crap, that was.
Basically, the refusal of DN! to allow a comments section is starting to look more and more suspicious - maybe they are just as dedicated to controlling the message as the New York Times is?
The alternate media, the corporate media, the mainstream media - it really is all just a blur with no clear borders or separating lines, always subject to manipulation and control by external forces.
Best learn to think for yourselves, and don't trust "leaders", even if they say you should. Go with your instinctive feelings - if it seems shady, it very well might be.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I am with you on this one, thought criminal..... and I would go a step further...
Posted by: Prophit
» Wow! Support from A 911truthiness nut! It's like being given a Turd Blossom...
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: Wow! Support from A 911truthiness nut! It's like being given a Turd Blossom...
Posted by: greenthumb
» Single-payer still better than the HMOs but not a final solution
Posted by: Lector
» RE: Single-payer still better than the HMOs but not a final solution
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 24, 2008 1:14 PM
Current rating: 2 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
WTF?
Hearst Entertainment & Syndication, one of the main operating units of The Hearst Corporation, includes Hearst's stakes in various cable TV networks, such as ESPN, Lifetime, A&E, and The History Channel. The unit also has television programming activities, producing documentary and reality shows such as The History Channel's Modern Marvels series. In addition, Hearst Entertainment & Syndication houses King Features Syndicate, a distributor of comics and columns to newspapers. Its Reed Brennan Media Associates subsidiary provides production support and editing services for newspapers.
Okay - so Amy Goodman IS the corporate media! Gosh, it took me long enough to figure that out...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: P.S. is Amy Goodman really writing for Hearst Communications?
Posted by: mmckinl
» you don't find it odd?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: P.S. is Amy Goodman really writing for Hearst Communications?
Posted by: Midway54
» Do you know who Hearst Communications is?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» I fear its time to be questioning everyone now. Many have sold out.....
Posted by: Prophit
» Look, 911 Truthiness troll - don't play silly games.
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
Comments are closed-
Posted by: mmckinl on Apr 25, 2008 1:30 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is time for Progressives and Liberals to demand what is right, and in this case actually less expensive and more efficient. The time is past for compromise and defeat on public issues without an all out war for the Common Good.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I was hoping for an explanation of how the Fed sets health policy in the U.S. . .
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: I was hoping for an explanation of how the Fed sets health policy in the U.S. . .
Posted by: mmckinl
» RE: I was hoping for an explanation of how the Fed sets health policy in the U.S. . .
Posted by: greenthumb
Comments are closed-
Posted by: drricklippin on Apr 25, 2008 5:23 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is my plan which Hillary liked in 1995
GROW UP AMERICA-A HEALTH CARE PLAN FOR ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS*
-Stop prolonging death. It’s both expensive and dehumanizing at best, greedy and cruel at worst.
-Empower US citizens to assume increased individual responsibility for health and convince medical consumers that it is in their best interests not to assume the role of helpless, dependent victims/patients.
-Yet also recognize that we have medicalized America’s social problems. So we must provide healthy and safe jobs for all able citizens thereby reducing poverty and all its subsequent health impacts (possibly 1/3rd of health care costs)
-Provide healthy environments including healthy air, water, soil and food.
-Rebuild America’s public health infrastructure to ensure we provide appropriate macro and individual interventions to especially low income citizens such as childhood and adult immunizations and response to man-made and natural catastrophes.
-Face the reality that a very large percentage of illnesses, injuries and hospitalizations are entirely preventable. Subsequently, the elimination of tobacco, alcohol, drug, medication and dietary abuse alone could immediately reduce medical costs by a factor of at least fifty percent.
-Incent and train physicians to maintain the health of patients and populations. Radical changes in provider re-imbursement and medical education strategies are necessary
-Recognize that early childhood preventive medical education can profoundly affect lifelong health behaviors.
*proposed in June of 1995
Revised January 2006/2007
Dr. Rick Lippin
Southampton,Pa
http://medicalcrises.blogspot.com
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I'm usually not afraid of single-payer, universal, or even socialized medicine, BUT:
Posted by: rickiey
» But Rick - you'll lower the GDP, and that's bad for everyone!
Posted by: thoughtcriminal
» RE: But Rick - you'll lower the GDP, and that's bad for everyone!
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
» RE: Friedman's a has-been...
Posted by: carcinoid112
» RE: Friedman's a has-been...
Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: Friedman's a has-been... those of us in health care will be OK
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
» RE: Friedman's a has-been... those of us in health care will be OK
Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: Friedman's a has-been... those of us in health care will be OK
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
» A single-payer system will be a HUGE savings on GDP...
Posted by: Bearzerker
» RE: A single-payer system will be a HUGE savings on GDP...
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Purple Girl on Apr 25, 2008 5:33 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: sausage on Apr 25, 2008 6:15 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sirota quote's the most damning evidence from The Hill story:"Congressional Democrats are backing away from healthcare reform promises made by their two presidential candidates, saying that even if their party controls the White House and Congress, sweeping change will be difficult...Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), a member of Senate Democratic leadership and a key Hillary Clinton ally who also sits on the Finance Committee, said he is 'not sure we have the big plan on healthcare.'...'Healthcare I feel strongly about, but I am not sure that we're ready for a major national healthcare plan,' Schumer said...Rep. Kendrick Meek (D-Fla.), a Clinton supporter who sits on the House Ways and Means Committee, said "the money is not necessarily there right now" to enact the plans."
I also speculate that Hillary Clinton's call for mandatory ownership of healthcare insurance by every able-bodied American is a potential deal killer. And she knows it.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 25, 2008 7:11 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And I'm still waiting for a response from Amy Goodman and Democracy Now as to why they don't allow the public to post any comments on their stories.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» They don't allow comments on their stories because.....
Posted by: Prophit
» RE: I think that this article shows a rather simple truth:
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Prophit on Apr 25, 2008 7:52 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't want to use it, support it or pay for it. would I still control what happens to my body??? Or do I submit to the state controlled by the elite????
Imagine Dick Cheney in charge of health care for Americans..... I mean, people, come on use your head. He is heartless and cruel and evil and he would be in charge to do what???? experiments??? make us sick???? die early when we are not productive???? I am trying to imagine a system controlled by Dick Cheney since that is what you all are advocating.
BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU ASK FOR, YOU JUST MIGHT GET IT. Remember, health care in the prison system is already under control of the government and look what they are doing to our prisoners???? They are using them for medical experimentations and also to our military. We have literally had soldiers die from thsoe experiments. I don't want gov control of anything that affects my right to live. Thanks but no thanks.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» The loonie-libertarian, right squeeks
Posted by: sausage
» RE: The loonie-libertarian, right squeeks
Posted by: willymack
» RE: Whatever happened to our innate right to choose????
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
Comments are closed-
Posted by: rsmohio on Apr 25, 2008 8:34 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Andie927 on Apr 25, 2008 9:59 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This means you pick your doctor, go to a clinic, or emergency room, get the care 'Your Doctor' thinks is best (verses our system where an Insurance Bean-Counter decides what care the doctor can give you). There's only ONE Billing System, like Medicare! Yes, preventive care is encouraged to keep costs down.
What the Green Party promotes is Single-Payer Non-Profit, meaning that the hospitals, clinics, ect. can not 'make a profit off sick people'. The Doctors would still make a very good salary, and the nurses, even the hospital administrators, what they can't do is make 3.1 Billion a year, off the illness of others!
Personal responsiblity only goes so far! The environment you live in, the type of work you do, the quality of food you can afford to buy, and the genes you inherite also have an effect on your health! Before you put all the Blame for high health care costs on 'irresponsible individuals' that smoke &/or drink, there's a whole field of medicine dedicated to SPORTS Medicine! Jogger's with bad knees, and tennis elbow, are you going to tell everyone to stop all of these kind of injury prone behaviors to stop too??
We, as a Nation rank very low on the totum pole 28th & 38th ?, for health outcomes, while spending more then twice as much!
There's obviously a lot of room for improvement! Openingup our Medical Schools, to ALL qualified American students (the Federal Gov. already subsidizes them) would be a start! Removing the 'PROFIT FACTOR' from healthcare, for Essential Medical Care, would be another. When a new drug is discovered, by grant money thru the NIH, that drug should be available, at a reduced cost!
What is stopping any of these Common Sense changes? Corporate Greed!!Dems. and Repugs. both being in the pockets of Lobbyists, and Doners! The solution: Public Campaign Finance!
OR better yet: The Green Party! That doesn't take Corporate Donations, that is slowly building a substancial party, 85 members currently hold office, and 1000 candidates running, Everyone of them support the Party Platform, Single-Payer Non-Profit HealthCARE!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: willymack on Apr 25, 2008 11:11 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: westomoon on Apr 25, 2008 12:37 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Amy's point was that the political winds oppose this. I've thought long & hard about it, and realized that no candidate can propose single-payer during an election -- there is just too much money being thrown at the issue by the insurance, pharma, and for-profit health industries. It will have to come after the candidate is in office. That has ended up being one of the reasons I support Barack Obama -- I think, with him (and with some really good new D Senators and Representatives from the upcoming elections), there's a chance we might get it.
Mr. McCain obviously will not be a route to a rational national health plan. Mrs. Clinton has deep roots in the healthcare question, and they come nowhere near the single-payer option. Aside from the tremendous money she has gotten from the industries that profit from our current system, she also has substantial ego involvement in her health-care plan of 1993, a deluxe buffet for the insurance industry with absolutely no government regulation of costs, profits, availability, or anything else. And we have seen how hard it is for her to admit any action of hers might have been wrong -- I don't think there's a snowball's chance she will ever support a single-payer system.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: The Politics of It
Posted by: wolfgangmo75
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Rosasharn on Apr 25, 2008 2:47 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: greenthumb on Apr 25, 2008 9:41 PM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are growing and learning.Next we need to demand more from our politicians and hold their feet to the fire.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: DaBear on Apr 25, 2008 11:54 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
god dammit if you actually like health care in the US (paying 50% of your pay to insurance companies, letting HMOs decide for you when you breathe, eat, shit and copulate copays that bankrupt a body after one hospital stay) fine, enjoy it, but you're still a fucking moron for loving that batshit excuse for health care.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Single Payer does not mean govt run/managed...Prophit
Posted by: DaBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: oxheadone on Apr 26, 2008 6:57 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: PJAW on Apr 27, 2008 7:46 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unfortunately, in today's political context, the misread headline was not that shocking to me.
Sheesh...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Liberty G on Apr 27, 2008 5:27 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The bottom line is that our "health care" system is a monopoly of the pharmaceutical and high tech/surgery peddlers.
The bottom line is that in most countries in the world, many alternative and holistic and traditional and herbal modalities are employed - at great savings and producing far better health results.
Just saying the government should hold the purse strings instead of the health insurance companies isn't enough change to really make a difference. In fact, it just creates another monopoly. If you don't agree with what they say is the care you should have, tough!
Britain, by contrast, has five homeopathic hospitals covered by national health, along with many other alternative medicine options. Germany has for years paid for all natural remedies found by their Commission E research to be effective and safe. The majority of health care in the world is NOT allopathic drugs and surgery!
Whoever pays, we need to have more and more moderately priced treatment choices available.
And, by the way, a huge improvement in our national health picture would occur if we took seriously the chemical stew in which we are living - not just outdoor air pollution, but the products we buy and the chemicals from them that wind up in the water we drink - along with the pesticide, hormone and antibiotic residues in our food.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Apr 28, 2008 10:14 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Did anyone see the Frontline on PBS series on this it covered 5-6 other industrialized nations who all do this and better and much much cheaper than the United States..!
Obama Clinton are talking about Insurance not coverage or Heath Care..
They're in the insurance companies pockets..!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: 2cynical on Apr 29, 2008 12:57 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pdxstudent on May 1, 2008 6:41 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now it's time? How about six months ago when there were still candidates, like Dennis Kucinich, offering these kinds of things and more?
I'm sorry, you shoot yourself in the foot and you're going to bleed.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Could Your Cell Phone End Up Killing You?
The Overuse of Antibiotics in Livestock Feed Is Killing Us
One of the Most Common Chemicals Used in Modern Life Is Now Being Seen as a Health Threat




