Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Health & Wellness

Want to Shut Conservatives Out of Power for Good? Implement Universal Health Care

By Sara Robinson, Campaign for America's Future. Posted October 31, 2008.


Giving Americans universal access to health care will undermine some of the deepest and most persistent myths of the conservative worldview.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg



We've worked hard to build a progressive political juggernaut that will, God willing and the creek don't rise, put us in control of both Congress and the Executive Branch starting just a week from now.

But it's one thing to get power, and another thing to keep it.

Someone (OK, it was Rick Perlstein) recently asked a group of friends to name the single most important policy step progressives could take to solidify a long-term grip on the government -- the kind of extended run we had from 1932 through to the Age of Reagan.



There were a lot of good answers. Ending privatization was, I thought, the best answer of all. Reinvesting in education is important if we want to ensure that the next generation will support and sustain our work and values. (I like to joke that the reason they call it "liberal education" is that the more of it you have, the more liberal you're likely to be. It's not quite accurate, but it's true enough.) Ensuring that people's interactions with government are useful and positive was another: In a lot of states, one afternoon at the DMV is enough to make the most ardent good-government partisan turn into Grover Norquist. (Maybe we don't want to drag the whole government into the bathtub to drown it, but that SOB at Window 11 would be a fine place to start.)

But in the end, I settled on "provide universal health care -- preferably single-payer" as my final answer. I chose this not just because health care is an important public good (though it is), but because I'm convinced that this single step will do more to rapidly and permanently undermine the conservative worldview than anything else we could possibly do.

How Universal Care Changes Everything: The Canadian Example


I've seen this happen, at very close range. Over the course of nearly five years living in Canada, I've been continually impressed by the durable, far-reaching role universal health care plays in expressing and reinforcing the entire country's political philosophy. It's probably not overstating things to say that the health care system is at the very core of the Canadian sense of national identity, right up there with the Mounties and the Hudson's Bay Company and well above the Queen. Every time my neighbors go to the doctor, the experience reaffirms a set of cultural assumptions that, over time, have made and kept the country unwaveringly progressive.



First, they're reminded that taking care of each other is a core Canadian value -- a cherished piece of who they are. In the Harper era, the conservatives up here have tried hard to sell American-style rugged individualism and the belief that "you're on your own" (or should be), beholden to no one, needing no one. Most Canadians reject this as a peculiar form of insanity: Their interdependence is so patently obvious to them that it's like denying the existence of gravity. They're so proud of their health care system -- and what it says about them as a nation -- that, when asked to name the greatest Canadian in history a few years ago, they chose Tommy Douglas, the provincial premier (governor) from Saskatchewan who was the father of the first single-payer plan.

Second, they're reminded that their government does useful and important things that add immensely to their quality of life, and thus deserves their ongoing support. And their high hopes also lead to high expectations. They not only expect a lot from their health care system; they also expect that their police will be respectful and law-abiding, their city parks will be well-tended; and their public buildings will be beautiful. If it takes money to make that happen, they'll spend it -- but those who've been trusted with it had better be damned careful. Where Americans believe in "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," the Canadian Constitution calls for "peace, order, and good government." And that set of aspirations is reinforced every time they walk into a doctor's office and get the treatment they need.

Third, they're reminded that certain rights are inalienable, and certain levels of inequality are intolerable -- and that every Canadian has an intrinsic and equal entitlement to shelter, food, education, and health care. In the conservative era, America's hypercompetitive society has been very quick to throw away people who haven't made the cut in some way -- people without money, connections, or education; people with disabilities that make them economically less viable; people who come from the wrong racial or religious group or the wrong part of the country. You only deserve what you, personally, are capable of earning. If you're badly equipped to do that, it's your own damned fault. If you can't afford health care, you deserve to die. In no case is it the taxpayers' job to step in and make it right.

That attitude is completely foreign up here. It's notoriously hard for immigrants to find good jobs here, but even immigrants get health care. There's a heroin problem in downtown Vancouver, but even junkies get health care. You don't lose your insurance just because you got sick, or got disabled, or had to quit your job; even the unemployed get health care.

Nobody falls through the cracks, no matter what condition their condition is in. Nobody is chained to a job they hate because they can't afford to lose their health care. Nobody has to pass up the chance to go back to school, or take a year abroad, or stay home with their kids. Nobody hesitates before starting their own business, either. The result is a healthier, more skilled, better-traveled, more fulfilled, more entrepreneurial and ultimately more competitive workforce.

A lot of Americans seem downright threatened by the idea that everybody deserves the same level of health care, delivered by the same doctors. It sounds like wild-eyed socialist ranting (all this crazy talk of "rights"!). For Canadians, though, that right is such a basic assumption that it's not even up for discussion. A civilized country does not turn any of its citizens away from the table. And that idea, once set, opens up a broader sense of what we owe each other. Health care is the social contract in daily action. Ultimately, having that contract reaffirmed so intimately and so often affects how my neighbors do business, how they treat the environment, and how they relate to the rest of the world. The effects of this affirmation ripple out into everything Canada touches.

Which brings us to the last observation: sharing a common health care system reminds Canadians that they're all in this together. From the richest to the poorest, everyone arrives and dies in the same hospitals, tended by the same doctors. It's in nobody's interest to let that system fail. (Prairie folks -- Canada's version of Midwesterners -- will tell you that the northern climate extremes also encourage people to look out for each other. And that makes some sense, too: denying help to neighbors and strangers during the winter in places like Edmonton or Winnipeg can all too easily become an act of negligent homicide. In extreme conditions, free access to good hospitals becomes a critical piece of that caretaking.)

The upper classes occasionally try to introduce privatization options in one province or another; but the citizens/patients, the government, and the health care unions have usually brought tremendous pressure to bear to limit or end these experiments. Everybody understands that if the wealthy bail on the system, there won't be the political will to keep the quality high. This conversation is ongoing -- and the very fact that they keep having it also helps keep the symbolic importance of the system front and center. Everybody understands very clearly what's at stake.



How Guaranteed Health Care Could Change America






If we could get Americans thinking along similar lines, all manner of impossible things will become possible. With one fell stroke, providing universal access to health care will instantly undermine some of the deepest and most persistent myths of the conservative worldview. People will, very quickly, remember that we cannot function as a democracy unless we're deeply invested in common wealth and a common future -- that "you're on your own" is simply a conservative lie that allows the rich to divide and conquer. We'll be startled at first to see just how much a single well-run government program can actually deliver -- and then, as our confidence grows, we'll start expecting more of other government efforts, and become more willing to experiment with other kinds of programs. It's quite likely we'll start asking hard questions about programs that divert taxpayers' money away from these essential goods, and re-prioritize our spending. Thrown together into a shared health care system, we may even learn some compassion for each other, and start to heal some of the deep social and political rifts that have divided us for so long.



If it works in the U.S. half as well as it does in Canada, the conservatives will be forced to give up on all those plans for that big 2012 comeback they're so eagerly anticipating right now. With roughly a third of the country either uninsured or under-insured; and everybody else at risk of losing their coverage at a moment's notice, the sheer relief at having that burden lifted from 300 million souls is going to make the old conservative nostrums sound absolutely insane. Anybody who suggests that there's something wrong with universal care, or that it was better the old way, or that this is that Pure Communist Evil they've been warning about since the days of McCarthy, is going to be dismissed out of hand as an ideological crank. Because only people who buy their Kool-Aid by the barrel could even think about going back to the awful way things were in 2008.

It's all happened just this way before, of course. Social Security did all these same things in its time. It shut up the economic royalists and reintroduced Americans to the value of social contracts and a belief in the common good. Americans accepted these ideas so completely that liberals were able to seize control of the country's political discourse, and dominate it for the next four decades. On most issues, the conservatives had no choice but to follow their lead.

Unfortunately, though, all this happened over 70 years ago -- so far in the past that most Americans can't even imagine what life was like before we had a guaranteed retirement income. We take that much too much for granted now. Creating a long-term 21st-century progressive renaissance depends on our ability to bring these same lessons home to a whole new generation in the most vivid and unforgettable way possible. Guaranteed health care will do that. It has the potential to become the catalyst for a new season of American progressivism that could last another 40 years.

This notion is no secret to conservatives, who figured out 15 years ago that universal health coverage could well become their undoing. In the heat of the 1993 debate over the proposed Clinton health care plan, Bill Kristol wrote a famous strategy memo in which he argued that "passage of the Clinton health care plan in any form would be disastrous. It would guarantee an unprecedented federal intrusion into the American economy. Its success would signal the rebirth of centralized welfare-state policy at the very moment that such policy is being perceived as a failure in other areas."

Conservatives are already acutely aware that if we get health care that works, they're going to be shut out of power and out of the conversation for decades to come. They also know that, come January, they may find themselves too weak to put up a fight.

Presidential candidate Barack Obama knows it, too, which is why he's made universal health care a central part of his agenda. If he succeeds, I think people are going to be surprised at the depth and speed of the resulting leftward shift in American values. Seeing the government deliver such an essential and powerful good to so many people will permanently discredit many of the most fundamental assumptions of the conservative worldview -- and in doing so, will make it much, much harder for the cons to ever make themselves politically relevant again.

There's nothing else that will do so much for so many so quickly -- and, at the same time, lay down the sturdy foundation for a long, strong progressive future.

Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: health, obama, health care, universal health care

Sara Robinson is a twenty-year veteran of Silicon Valley, and is launching a second career as a strategic foresight analyst. When she's not studying change theories and reactionary movements, you can find her singing the alto part over at Orcinus. She lives in Vancouver, BC with her husband and two teenagers.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Health and Wellness! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Keeping Power?
Posted by: Jbuuty on Oct 31, 2008 1:06 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I hope that the Democrats can win, and maintain, the presidency and congress for more than one or two election cycles, I don't think that keeping power in the vein of Rove's permanent Republican power is a good thing. The Left and Democrats are as capable of corruption and ruining a nation as conservatives and Republicans.

I hope the Republican party can change, moving away from it's Straussian, neo-fascist leanings toward a more Eisenhower-like conservatism. Democracy needs balances between forces of political power to remain a democracy.

That said, universal health care would be great and may in effect force the GOP to change as most conservative parties in Europe have been forced to do.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Keeping Power? Posted by: dcyalter
» RE: Keeping Power? Posted by: Tokyo Tuds
» RE: Keeping Power? Posted by: Spot
Middle of the road.
Posted by: Karl.Ben on Oct 31, 2008 3:51 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
why would someone want to shut an opposing view out of power for good. Are we becoming a dictatorship? Both parties (aligning the dems with liberals and repubs with conservatives) have done the best they can to ruin this country. Both are on power trips, each has taken their turn in chipping away at our economy.

What we need is to shut out both conservatives and liberals. Then we might have a truly functioning nation.

BTW, universal healthcare is becoming the ruination of Europe. The cost burden is enormous and liberals want to complete the process in this country of putting the last nail in our financial coffin.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: LOVE YOUR SIMPLISTIC VIEWS Posted by: walldodger1969
» RE: LOVE YOUR SIMPLISTIC VIEWS Posted by: Karl.Ben
» economic ruination Posted by: truthlover
» RE: economic ruination Posted by: Bliss Doubt
» RE: economic ruination Posted by: Karl.Ben
» RE: economic ruination Posted by: wolfgangmo
» one more point... Posted by: Karl.Ben
» RE: Middle of the road. Posted by: Tokyo Tuds
Sara assumes
Posted by: kegbot1 on Oct 31, 2008 4:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That Barack Obama is to the USA what Tommy Douglas was to Canada.

Maybe, maybe not.

The political will to take on and destroy the health industry mafia is, I believe, not within Obama or any other American politician who enjoys the perks of power.

And Grover Nordquist and his flying monkeys have done a great job crippling the spending ability of the US government and also weakening the attitudes of the American people toward their government.

And, unlike Canada, we have a strong religious bent in the USA that trains people to walk around sputtering: 'he who does not work shall not eat,' or, for that matter, deserve health care. This is a powerful cultural belief to overcome - the belief that only those who produce a certain amount of wealth deserve a certain amount of health.

We already have a massive wave of medically induced bankruptcies and it is getting worse. And yet nothing happens. Again, even Obama and HRC only talk about tinkering around the edges and keeping the insurance companies and medical corporations in the money loop. There is no will for this fight in the political class no matter how much the public may plead.

And so we continue to have bake sales and fund raisers for the children of people in our communities who need life saving surgeries and we call ourselves civilized.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Sara assumes Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Sara assumes Posted by: kegbot1
» RE: Sara assumes Posted by: madregal
» Religious mindset - ironic Posted by: truthlover
» RE: eligious mindset - ironic Posted by: Bliss Doubt
Canada has elected the conservative Harper twice!
Posted by: citizenjoe on Oct 31, 2008 4:55 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Universal single payer health care exists in almost all of Europe, indeed in most of the industrialized world. Conservatives have taken power through out these countries.How about the vile Margaret Thatcher or the vile Tony Blair (PM 1997-2007) and New Labor in UK? The list is revolting. How about the little demagogue Sarkozy in France? Does MS. Robinson not understand that the USA is an Empire, making her analogy invidious.The problem is corporate capitalism trends to the right. Seems this article as dumb as Palin and McCain

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Sure a PM is easier to dislodge Posted by: citizenjoe
Health care seems to control us as nothing else can
Posted by: Beck on Oct 31, 2008 5:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Making us keep our mouths shut at work, making us afraid to make changes in our lives; the fear of losing health care seems now the biggest fear. If the election is again stolen, it will be fear of losing benefits that keeps people from demonstrating for days on end.

Wonder how many fewer abortions there would be if there were universal health care.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Problem with Health Care
Posted by: Nicnic on Oct 31, 2008 5:02 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The problem with all health care plans is that they are based on political accommodation. The recipient historically gets sicker as we throw more and more money at the problem after the fact.

True health care demands education and responsibility on the front end. Ninety percent of the degenerative conditions in this country are onset from abusive dietary and lifestyle patterns combined with the trickle-down affects of the rapidly declining health of a failing ecosystem, which is our truest measure of human health, mentally, physically and spiritually.

Contrary to popular self indulgent beliefs our conditions are NOT GENETIC and almost all of them can be avoided. People need to learn the truth about the manner in which they are raised into a disease state and then harvested like the very corn fed mutes they consume to excess. They then need to evolve their awareness and act responsibly towards the planet and all living creatures beginning with themselves. Then, and only then will we have a viable health care plan. Then, and only then will disease decline and the cost of health care will fall to easily manageable levels.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The Power of Primary Prevention Posted by: socialpsych
Health Care
Posted by: RedFoxOne on Oct 31, 2008 5:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We need to do something with healthcare as it is currently, its a big runaway train and is clearly out of control!

Jiff
Privacy Center

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Isn't It Obvious?
Posted by: Last Chance on Oct 31, 2008 5:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The simplest way to implement universal health care is to extend Medicare to all citizens.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Agreed! Posted by: zooeyhall
» Yes! Posted by: splashy
» Hadn't thought of it. Posted by: Bliss Doubt
Bsels
Posted by: bsels on Oct 31, 2008 5:53 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Without the U.S. next door and convenient access to top medical care, the Canadian health care system would not be sustainable. More applicable models are in Western Europe, where costly national health systems drive marginal tax rates through the roof. If you like welfare states, such as France, then be willing to sacrifice jobs and economic growth for government-provided health care. The U.S. wants both jobs and decent health care and has got to find economically sustainable ways to provide both. We certainly have had difficulty in doing this. Yet there are some promising approaches that are surfacing. Readers who would be willing to consider a competitive private-sector based model that provides intelligent incentives for both insurance subscribers and medical providers might want to pull up John McCain's website or Newt Gingrich's.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Get bent Posted by: kegbot1
» RE: Bsels Posted by: Bliss Doubt
» Unproven assertions Posted by: peskyfly1
» RE: Bsels Posted by: richholland
» RE: Bsels Posted by: Tokyo Tuds
» RE: Bsels Posted by: tdterry1999
» Trolls with an agenda Posted by: wolfgangmo
Follow the money!
Posted by: jlohman on Oct 31, 2008 6:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It never ceases to amaze me, the amount of energy that can go into a project just to avoid doing the right thing. The best, simplest, least costly, most effective thing we could do is expand what has been working so well for years, Medicare. You get sick, you get care, and the caregiver gets paid. Nothing could be simpler.

But follow the money and you’ll find why the politicians don’t like it a bit. They get their money from insurance interests.

Jack Lohman
MoneyedPoliticians.net

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Follow the money! Posted by: bthespoon
» RE: Follow the money! Posted by: Last Chance
» RE: Follow the money! Posted by: Belisarius6
» OOPS! Posted by: Last Chance
» RE: Follow the money! Posted by: kegbot1
Our American Democracy
Posted by: bsdone on Oct 31, 2008 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sara Robinson is right!

Neocon establishment cannot allow democracy by example.

Look back at the US foreign interventions, for example what they did in Chile overthrowing
Alliende.

On NPR, they often use the phrase "in our American Democracy" - yes,
indeed, this is democracy for the rich, by the rich.

If democracy reaches lower class, they call it "communism"
Ha, ha, ...

Read Howard Zinn and Noam Chomsky!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RESPECTFULLY-WRONG CHOICE FOR PROGRESSIVE AGENDA
Posted by: drricklippin on Oct 31, 2008 6:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I favor health care for all US citizens, essentially we as patients have been duped into thinking that we actually need high tech-high cost bio-medical interventions.

Many of these interventions do not stand the test of efficacy (do they work?) and worse do not stand the test of safety (do they cause harm?)

What we need is much more emphasis on individual(health behaviors)and, even more immportant, institutional (public health)prevention

The answer to sustaining the progressive agenda is jobs for all which ironically has a huge health impact.

Dr. Rick Lippin
Southampton,Pa
ralippin@aol.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» good points doc Posted by: kegbot1
» RE: good points doc Posted by: drricklippin
» As usual you are right. Posted by: wolfgangmo
Wow? Wrecking healthcare to score a political win?
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Oct 31, 2008 7:52 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Tunnel vision amongst folks who are overly obsessed with politics could ruin both health care and our political process.

Yeah, the two-party system sucks. It's not worth killing your neighbors over, though. No thanks to rationed care.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Did you read that article? Posted by: ABetterFuture
Teddy Roosevelt was for universal health care
Posted by: l_double_e on Oct 31, 2008 7:56 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Is it so wrong to hope that everyone can gain access to a doctor? Most ailments (asthma, cancer, diabetes) are due to environmental factors. Maybe we can get all the companies who pollute to pay for health care. But i have a better way. To pay for universal health care, we should tax every individual based on their body fat percentage. Since heart disease and some diabetes creeps in when people are overweight (as well as alot of arthritic conditions) if we tax fat people and people with unhealthy body fat percentages, we will encourage people to lead a more healthy lifestyle, which will cut down on health care costs. Everyone wins, even the big boned people, since the tax would be on body fat percentage.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Universal care in US could domino in other countries
Posted by: Guatemala on Oct 31, 2008 8:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sara,

I really enjoyed your post today! Your take on our healthcare system was very heart-warming (I'm a leftie from Vancouver)
I see another benefit from US universal healthcare: a domino-effect in Central America and the Caribbean. Thes small countries, largely ruled by neo-liberal elites follow avidly the US model. A sea-change in healthcare would be the excuse that international agencies would use to promote universal healthcare here too. And that would make some significant change in a region that desperately needs it.

Thanks for your writing.
Graeme Thompson, Guatemala City

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

gos
Posted by: goscott on Oct 31, 2008 8:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A bit of factual correction re: Tommy Douglas.
Indeed he was premier (of Saskstchewan) and the
father of single payer health care there and
across Can.
However, the position of premier is elected and
is analogous to the federal position of Prime
Minister (currently occupied by Stephen Harper).
The position of governor is an appointed and honorary one. Mr. Douglas was never in that position.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: gos Posted by: Tokyo Tuds
Want to shut crooks out of power for good?
Posted by: PaulK on Oct 31, 2008 8:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First, keep proportional representation in the Democratic presidential primary. Within four years the candidates will rear up onto their hind legs and actually think a bit.

Proportional representation means that a third candidate getting perhaps 10% of the primary delegates can possibly parley those delegates into the vice-presidency.

Having three or more candidates means that the power of mudslinging is diluted, while the backlash of mudslinging is still just as fierce. More views will be expressed.

Did you feel the excitement even in late primaries? A party where every voter is able to participate and be heard in the primaries will suck 100% of the air out of the second party.

My sense is that a coordinated and secretive Republican whispering campaign, linking some candidate to the Weather Underground, to Osama, to Muslims or to Arabs in general, to Marxist-Leninists, or to Aunt Jemimah, is overrated and in fact will eventually turn Evangelicals right off, if any of them have half a brain or a heart. Eventually that second party would have no choice but to follow suit, not act so much like creeps, and adopt proportional representation themselves to compete.

So, the result is more issues debate, less mudslinging, more candidates looking for popular issues (and hopefully voting for them when they reach office), and more emphasis on actual voters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Universal Healthcare
Posted by: sunlakedude on Oct 31, 2008 8:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I agree that Universal Healthcare is important and I think that it is equality important that the program would involve a "single payer" like Medicare. I fear that many will be willing to compromise by having health insurance companies administer the claims which I believe would be a big mistake. One of the reasons healthcare is so expensive in the U.S. is because too many people and corporations are making money off of it and they're making a LOT of money off of it.
But we will have to educate the U.S. public about all of this. I met a woman in Arizona within the last year who was working at an unskilled job for not much more than minimum wage and, while discussing this issue, she parroted off a familiar Right Wing talking point. She said "I don't trust the government to give me proper health care. I want choices." Here was a woman that had no real choices right now and certainly would not have any under McCain's health care plan, if you can call it a plan. I attempted to explain to her that only the wealthy have real choices in the U.S. and that the rest of us would do just fine under single-payer universal health insurance. I'm not sure, but I think I got through to her.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Universal Healthcare Posted by: richholland
» RE: Universal Healthcare AGREED Posted by: stopthemaddness2
Rather than being shut out, Obama's vision of America INCLUDES conservatives.
Posted by: USAFVeteran1966 on Oct 31, 2008 9:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Enough said.

Vietnam vet/Obama supporter
Eight reasons to vote against John McCain

PS: Hugh Scott asked me to thank the many AlterNet readers who visited his NONPROFIT website, www.UnfitMcCain.com, which received nearly two million hits since being launched in May 2008. As Scotty emailed me about his AlterNet promotional efforts, "Mission Accomplished!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama's plan is NOT the answer
Posted by: aalif ba ta tha on Oct 31, 2008 10:22 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama's plan is the Mitt Romney plan, which has proven time and again to be a complete FAILURE. Massachusetts pays the highest health care costs in the USA and doesn't have the greatest care.

Once Obama gets in office, we have to convince him to do single-payer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Please answer this poll on single payer universal health care at http://poll.democratz.org
Posted by: www.dmocrats.org on Oct 31, 2008 10:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I want people's opinion on single payer universal health care.

Please answer a poll on universal health care at http://poll.democratz.org

You can watch Countdown with Keith Olbermann at
http://liberal.democratz.org

You can watch The Young Turks Liberal talk show after you watch Countdown by clicking on the link that reads Watch the Young Turks, near the top of the page.

Look for the live chat box at the bottom of the page.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

keeps the trogs in line
Posted by: zooeyhall on Oct 31, 2008 11:52 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Depending on employer-provided health care is a good way to keep your workers in line. They aren't likely to rock the boat in your company knowing that if they leave, they will not only leave behind just a paycheck but also their health care.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pleasant Fantasy
Posted by: Sil on Oct 31, 2008 12:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Universal healthcare - and I mean actual universal healthcare, not Hillary's garnish-your-wages version that other countries with universal healthcare systems laugh at - is a pleasant thought. Unfortunately, the Democrats have no interest in implementing it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A split government...
Posted by: amerijake on Oct 31, 2008 12:57 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is healthy for the country. As the system was established, I actually believe the most successful American governments we have had have been a split legislative/executive branch. This being said, we need to keep the system divided, creating roadblocks for the most activist legislators. Think of majority governments in the past (Republicans 2002-2006, Democrats 1992-1994). There are clear examples of majority incompetence. To suggest that a full-time democratic majority is healthy for the country is the antithesis of what the system ought to be. Think independently. It's too easy to be blinded by the us vs. them mentality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not All Conservatives Are EVIL Some have so Much Money That All They Want To Do Is Conserve
Posted by: opmoc on Oct 31, 2008 2:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Natural Life

They simply have absolutely no interest in their Money


They just want to live a simple life

And Some Conservatives Go To Enormous Efforts Using All Their Wealth On a Trailing Down Basis - Such that by the time when they actually top 100

They will have spent ALL Their Money on VERY Important Conservation Projects Where The Local Human Community Lives in Balance With All Other Forms of Life in their Specific Geographic Area of Love.

Conservatives Shouldn't Be Slagged Off By Communists - Just Because of The Tag They Prefer To Be Identified By

Not All INCREDIBLY Wealthy People Are Evil

Some are actually INCREDIBLY Nice and Selfless

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» So in your world ... Posted by: wolfgangmo
What's "progressive"?
Posted by: DaBear on Oct 31, 2008 3:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We've worked hard to build a progressive political juggernaut that will, God willing and the creek don't rise, put us in control of both Congress and the Executive Branch starting just a week from now.

Hold up, stop right there. "Progressive"?! Um, last time I checked the actual evidence the "juggernaut" is centrist, meaning Not progressive per se.... anyone who voted for the bailout isn't progressive, sorry.

Language has meaning, let's be accurate please. Calling Obama and the other Dims progressive is lipsti.... oh darn, that got used already. But it's true.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama is NOT advocating Universal Healthcare... sara has gone off the deep end
Posted by: DaBear on Oct 31, 2008 3:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Presidential candidate Barack Obama knows it, too, which is why he's made universal health care a central part of his agenda. If he succeeds, I think people are going to be surprised at the depth and speed of the resulting leftward shift in American values.

Is Sara serious?! Holy crap, she's drunk the koolaid. Obama has never advocated UHC... just go to Michael Moore's site to read a scathing critique of Obama's "healthcare" plan.

Oh I can't wait until this is over and we get Sara Robinson, clear headed futurist back again. I promise not to tell her I told you so....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pretty Obvious.
Posted by: Nodarse on Oct 31, 2008 4:05 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A professor once gave me a reason why Governments take on certain duties like Police, Fire etc. and not privatize them. It's because running these services with a "profit motive" makes such enterprises counter-productive.

For example. Let's imagine that Police Departments were privatized like our current Health Care System. And every time Police Officers were needed a fee would be charged to those Customers.

From the Consumer's perspective, It's only fair that victims of crime should pay for Police assistance since they're the ones needing it. Why should I pay for YOUR Police protection? In this imaginary society, only those who can afford protection would receive it.

From the Police Dept.'s perspective, there is an incentive to make sure there is a sufficient amount of criminal activity taking place to guarantee profits. If society became crime-free, Police departments would go bankrupt.

I think we can agree that Police privatization would be foolish. So why do we allow our Health Services to be profit driven? Especially if the systems’ survival depends on people getting sick in greater numbers each year.

The vast majority of people can live their entire lives without ever needing the direct services of a Cop. But 100% of us will require the services of Doctors, Nurses and Pharmacists at least a dozen times in our lifetime.

It’s time for Universal Coverage...NOW!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It will take a generation or 2
Posted by: wolfgangmo on Oct 31, 2008 4:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Generations will be needed to straighten out the culture psyche of America much like it took in Canada.

I wonder if Obama's plan, which only monkey's with the edges of universal care will accomplish this. It will take a concentrated effort.

Perhaps we should do something with Grover N. that involves swimming and fishes - Jersey style.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mind Blowing
Posted by: peskyfly1 on Oct 31, 2008 4:39 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What will really blow your USians minds is the concept of single payer car insurance. Saskatchewan has it, just like the medicare system. Can you imagine a world where insurance was provided by a government crown corporation (designed to help people)?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I have a friend in Saskatchewan. Posted by: wolfgangmo
Remove Profit-motive
Posted by: Jeanne on Oct 31, 2008 5:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Insurance doesn't work (how could it?) when the aim of the buyer and the seller are diametrically opposed. Profit motive mandates that the insurer pay as little out as they can while taking in as much as they can possibly charge for their "service." Where in this calculation is there room for providing the most adequate, humane and thorough medical care? It simply can't work.

Life insurance works only because the insurance company knows that they will be paying off on it eventually -- you know, "nothing is certain but death and taxes...." They are just betting you'll live long and you are happy to lose the bet that you're going to die soon. Their pricing actuarials are based on that certainty.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Progressive does not equal democrat
Posted by: A. James on Oct 31, 2008 5:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
there is absolutely nothing in the past 30 years to suggest that there has been anything progressive about the democrat party at the national level (with the exception of dennis kucinich, of course). there ARE progressive parties out there, and if the presumed progressive majority of america actually took a stand behind, say,nader or the green party, THEN we might actually see a progressive government. at the very least, we should be relentlessly pounding our media outlets, especially self-designated progressive ones like alternet, to give fair voice to these and all political parties. alternet, why is it that you continue to ignore real progressive politicians like nader and mckinney when, presumably, your progressive audience would be receptive to their message?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So will ending the drug war.
Posted by: Dr T on Oct 31, 2008 7:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our war on drugs is, in reality, a war on people, particularly poor people of color.

Considering how far the pernicious tentacles reach into the depths of our society, legalizing all substances (eliminating all DEA Schedule I drugs and moving them into Schedule II) and regulating them based on their individual harm to public health will also destroy one on the major supports of the conservative worldview.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CommonDreamer
Posted by: CommonDreamer on Oct 31, 2008 8:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is a good article. If we can embed in the national consciousness the idea that we should have some form of universal health care (or a hybrid, as Obama offers, to placate the extremist capitalists) as a right, it might become as embedded in our culture as Medicare and Social Security have - and that would be a good step forward.

Remember though that no matter how much is accomplished in a progressive government, the inevitable backlash will begin, perhaps in four years - perhaps when the economy heals enough to take people away from that issue and drive them once again into the empty arms of the anti-culturalists (right wing). They say they are the cultural arbiters - and yet, our culture has never been worse, more stupid, nor more amoral and greedy. So brace yourselves. All the do-goodism we hope for won't change the underlying nature of regressivism. If it does, we will be happily surprised....but not surprised if it doesn't. The idea of a more fair, peaceful and worker-centered society - we can only hope this much better scenario also supplants the idea of extremist selfishness and individualism and insensitivity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

its not universal
Posted by: potus2008 on Oct 31, 2008 9:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't think Obamas health plan is really "Universal health plan" I don't think he could have ran on that if he had tried the insurance industry would have spent a billion dollars and destroyed his chances. This might come some day but right now the americans over 40 are mostly brain washed into thinking they have the best system in place, even when it totally fails them they sort of go along with it.

i doubt the republicans tried to stop it because they had fear that the philosophical insights that Universal care brings, rather it is all about the money, and the republican mantra of privatization -having the public subsidize private business much more expensively through the market rather than through government.

I also expect the republicans to get their act together by 2010 and 2112 and to grab a bigger share of the congress.

IO doubt obama will try to expand his health policy beyond what it is right now because that would be costly and a huge battle that he really cannot afford right now. he wants to build unity when he gets in and pass as many things as he can in his first two years. expanding the health care beyond what it is would eat up the resources and energy of passing many other important things, and Obama also will want to start off with success, and not legislation bogged down in congress with the same old bickering. perhaps if he has a great success his first term, a second term would provide the mandate togo a step further wit the health care. right now, it is something that most of us agree is good and should be done, but which is probably undoable with the debt and wars. However, should he have the gusto to go for it and get it, well it would be a blessed thing for our nation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ATH
Posted by: ATH on Nov 1, 2008 4:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not only are we not going to have universal
health care, we'll be lucky if we still have a
dollar worth even a 3rd of what it's worth now.
I don't understand why people don't get it:
the government is not really in charge...They have some power, especially the President, but
this country is run by private bankers and the heads of multi-national corporations.
The Federal Reserve is a PRIVATE bank, run like a corporation, not for the benefit of our nation or its people, but solely for the profit
of the secret shareholders behind the Federal Reserve, IMF, and World bank.
The booms and busts we have are NOT natural.
They come from this private bank, whom the government has to borrow its money from, and pay back with interest; first they expand the money supply-everyone buys lots of stuff, takes out loans..Then, they contract the money
supply, everyone has to sell their stuff for pennies on the dollar, and agents of the private bankers come alone and buy it all up.
Our entire money system is based on debt, manipulated by a fractional reserve banking system, using a fiat currency that's being completely abused. There's no capital backing any of the paper they print--only debt.
This can only last so long, and it's about come to its inevitable end, unless the people take back the power to create their own currency, to be used only to facilitate trade. Take back this power from the private bankers, and the wealth would begin to be ditributed much more evenly, we could pay off our debt..But first, we would have to print a new currency, get rid of fractional reserve banking (this is when a bank is allowed to loan out 10 times what it has in reserves), and phase out the Federal Reserve.
Of course, this would be very difficult to do. Only a Predident using our military could achieve this.
Our Founding Fathers knew well the dangers of letting private bankers control the money:

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, they, and the corporations that will rise up around them will--first through inflation, then by deflation--deprive the people of all their property until their children wake up homeless.."
--President Thomas Jefferson.

Homeless. Looks like he might have known what he was talking about, huh?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Look further than Canada and the UK
Posted by: lvanoost on Nov 1, 2008 9:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I totally agree with this analysis. Your health care system tells you what kind of society you're living in. Adopting the Canadian health care system would indeed be a major step forward for the American people. I understand that the comparison with Canada is made so often. It's nearby and English speaking (well, mostly). But even the Canadian health care system (or the British one) is still far behind the systems used in the Benelux and the Scandinavian countries. Not exactly English speaking countries, but anyway, these countries prove what most Americans know in their heart: that free market is great for a lot of things, but NOT for health care (or education). Take care (and keep up the good work at Alternet).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That's Why Canadaians Denied Conservatives a Parliamentary Majority -- TWICE
Posted by: SkeeterVT1 on Nov 1, 2008 10:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The genius of the Canadian political system and societal minsdet was demonstrated with crystal clarity on October 14, when Canadians -- for the second consecutive election -- denied Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservative Party an absolute majority in the House of Commons -- the lower house of the Canadian Parliament -- forcing his minority government to compromise with the opposition Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Quebecois in order to get major legislation passed.

Canadians may not like the idea of Liberal Party leader Stephane Dion as prime minister (and in fact, Dion is stepping down), but there was no way they were going to trust Harper's Conservatives with a Commons majority -- a minimum 155 of the Commons' 308 seats. The Conservatives won only 143 seats.

Besides, even if the Conservatives did win a majority, Canada has its own system of constitutional checks and balances.

The Canadian Senate, the unelected upper house of Parliament whose members are appointed for life by the prime minister, has -- like its British counterpart, the House of Lords -- the power to veto legislation passed by the House of Commons (although it does so only on very rare occasions). After 13 years of Liberal prime ministers prior to Harper's accsession to the top job in 2006, the 103-member Canadian Senate has a solid majority of Liberal senators.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Health care also for the democratic system
Posted by: Daniel35 on Nov 1, 2008 6:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"...for good" (in the article title) was maybe an over-statement. Democracy, while it lasts, even in it's present corrupt state, wasn't set up for that. Anyway, nothing is permanent; everything evolves.

Yes, a better health care system would create a lot of good will. I see continually increasing population as a major factor in virtually all our environmental and social problems. I'd support a system that concentrates on healing the potentially productive, encourages all forms of birth reduction, and ignores life extension. I say this as one well into my senior years, without genetic kids, with limited Social Security, I favor being immortalized by my effect on the culture, rather than by genes.

I usually put health of the planet first, but a healthy democracy is a move toward a better chance at health of many kinds, and probably more popular. We could do better than the two-party, electoral college election system.

I think a ranked voting system, such as Instant Recount Voting, would be a good place to start. I'm considering a system that goes way beyond that. It's rather dependent on elaborate computer data systems. (I also have ideas for secure and private computer voting, with or without a paper trail. But that's another story.)

Suppose voters each get 100 votes to divide as they see fit, maybe among candidates for each office, or maybe 100 to cover all offices. They also get 100 more to divide between all ballot measures (or eventually toward all legislative measures). The votes for candidates might evolve toward emphasis on write-ins (perhaps for anyone but oneself), and toward everyone having voting power proportional to their popularity. Since previous voting patterns are more indicative of one's morals than what they say during a campaign, those who think they deserve more power would be encouraged, and able, to make their votes public.

Send the many problems you'll no doubt find with such a system and I'll send solutions, or further explanations.

Dan Robinson, danrob@efn.org

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

caronome
Posted by: Bayardtom on Nov 1, 2008 9:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This article was so right on that I found myself weeping while reading it. This should be required reading for every citizen in the country. It's so simple - if we had a not for profit health care system in this country, it would change the country for the better in so many ways. I know that Canada has a very different attitude about life in general because of the feeling of security they have about life.If you saw Michael Moore's Sicko you know what we should have here, too.

In America, we are chained to a job we hate because we are afrsid to lose our health care. My husband virtually gave up his thriving career as a professional musician, conductor and composer so that we would be protected by health insurance provided by the achool system where he now teaches.I know, the children are getting the benefits of his wonderful talents and that's good but it's also a terrible thing that he has not been in the professional world that valued him so much, too.

And, of course, we would have been in real trouble because I have had cancer and many other health problems and I would have probably died if we had not had the coverage that was provided.But the attitude in this country is demoralizing in so many ways. In Canada there is so much less crime and so much more national pride than we have here.

My candidate for president is and was Dennis Kucinich who proposed a not for profit health care plan (Medicare for All) and it was largely ignored or ridiculed by the other candidates and the mainstream media who are controlled by the insurance companies and big business.

So I guess that we have to hope that Obama will know how to implement this idea because it looks like we are going down the wrong road in every area in this country. We, the people, have to demand that we have the care that every other industrialized nation in the world has had for a long time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the director
Posted by: the director on Nov 1, 2008 10:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our desire for health care is fear driven and is actually illness care.
The solution is prevention, and prevention is
changing what we eat. Not what we decide to eat but what is offered to us "to eat."
We spend the money so we can demand food not chemicals.
Chemical fertilizers are one of the things we never asked to be part of what we eat. A simple study of all nations which have adopted these chemical plant foods will give you an idea why we are less healthy.
Look at the power structure of the pharmaceutical / petrochemical complex and you
will find that the power mongers are pleased with our ill health, all republicans? No, all
greedy, yes. The profit incentive of this complex and of synthetic patented drugs may be the true impediment to our "ill health care system" from becoming a true health care system.
We are what we eat, when food is grown organically and if we become responsible for our health by getting of our fat behinds and excercising our heart the cost per capita of health care will become less of a hinderance
to our population.
Fear to be healthy, it may save your life.
Until we change how our food is grown consider supplementing those minerals depleted from our soils could beneficial. Our Study believes that sulfur is one mineral which chemical fertilizers have effectively eliminated from our diets.
Patrick McGean
Live Blood and Cellular Matrix Study
organicsulfur@sisna.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: the director Posted by: aeonpi
IF MCCAIN GET IN AND TAXES HEALTH BENEFITS NOONE WILL HAVE HEALTHCARE
Posted by: cori on Nov 3, 2008 5:23 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
IF YOU THIDK ITS BAD NOW WAIT UNTIL MCAIN GET IN. HE WILL ATTACK IRAN, TAKS AWAY HEALTH CARE AND WIPE OUT SOCIAL SECURITY.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Awesome
Posted by: aeonpi on Nov 3, 2008 6:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am all for it. Universal Healthcare and Natural pathic solutions

www.aeonpi.com
we are the cure to what ails the world.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement