Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • 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.

Health & Wellness

The Failed Health Care Reform Plan of 2009

By Vicente Navarro, CounterPunch. Posted March 14, 2008.


Neither Clinton nor Obama's health care plans get at the root problem our of broken system.
Advertisement

A major problem -- if not the major problem -- for many people living in the U.S. is the difficulty of accessing and paying for medical care when they are sick. For this reason, candidates in the presidential primaries of 2008 -- the Democrats more often than the Republicans -- have been recounting stories about the health-related tragedies they have encountered in meetings with ordinary people around the country (an exercise conducted in the U.S. every four years, at presidential election time). These stories tell of the enormous difficulties and suffering faced by many people in their attempts to get the medical care they need. I have been around long enough -- I was senior health advisor to Jesse Jackson in the Democratic primaries of 1984 and 1988 -- to know how frequently Democratic candidates, over the years, have referred to such cases. The only things that change are the names and faces in these human tragedies. Otherwise, the stories, year after year, are almost the same.

In the Democratic Party primaries of 1988, for example, candidate Michael Dukakis talked about a young single mother who had two jobs and still could not afford medical insurance for herself and her children. In 1992, Bill Clinton did the same, changing the story only slightly. This time it was the case of a woman with diabetes who could not get health insurance because of her chronic condition. And now, in the 2008 primaries, Hillary Rodham Clinton (whom I worked with on the White House Health Care Reform Task Force in 1993) describes a similar case. This time it is a single woman, with two daughters, who cannot pay her medical bills because her congenital heart defect makes it impossible for her to get medical insurance coverage. And Barack Obama describes similar cases, with the eloquence that characterizes all of his speeches. He frequently refers to his own mother, who had cancer and had to worry not only about her illness but about paying her medical bills.

All these cases are tragic and are representative of a situation faced by millions of people in the U.S. every year. But, I am afraid that unless the winning Democratic candidate, once elected president (and I hope he or she will be), develops a more comprehensive health care proposal than any of those put forward in the primaries so far, we will see the same situation continue. Democratic candidates in the 2012 primaries, and in the 2016 primaries, will still be referring to single mothers with chronic health conditions who cannot pay their medical bills. The proposals put forward by Obama and Clinton underestimate the gravity of the problem in the U.S. medical care sector. The situation is bad and is getting worse: the number of people who are uninsured and underinsured has been growing since 1978.

Let's start with the uninsured, those people who do not have any form of health benefits coverage. There were 21 million uninsured people in the U.S. in 1972. By 2006, that number had more than doubled to 47 million. And this increase has been independent of economic cycles. The number of uninsured grew by 3.4 million from 2004 to 2006, even as a resurgent economy raised incomes and lowered poverty rates. Meanwhile, during those years, the Democratic Party establishment distanced itself from any commitment to resolving these problems. Even though the 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988, and 1992 Democratic Party platforms included calls for health care benefits coverage for everyone (what is usually referred to as "universal health care"), that call was usually made without much conviction. In the primaries of 1988, when I was involved in preparing the Democratic platform, Dukakis (the winner of the primaries) resisted including universal health care in the party platform. He was afraid of being perceived as "too radical." He had to accept it, however, because Jesse Jackson agreed to support Dukakis (Jackson had 40 percent of the Democratic delegates at the Atlanta convention) only if the platform included this call for universal care.

Then, in 1992, Bill Clinton (who borrowed extensively from Jackson's 1988 proposals) put the call for universal health care at the center of his program. But, once president, his closeness to Wall Street and his intellectual dependence on Robert Rubin of Wall Street (who became his Secretary of the Treasury) made him leery of antagonizing the insurance industry. It was President Clinton's unwillingness to confront the insurance companies that led to his failure to honor his commitment to work toward a universal health care program (see my article "Why HillaryCare Failed," Counterpunch, November 12, 2007). The type of reform President Clinton called for was a health insurance based model called "managed care," in which insurance companies remain at the center of health care. An alternative approach could have been to establish a publicly funded health care program (which was favored by the majority of the population) that would cover everyone, providing medical care as an entitlement for all citizens and residents. This could have been achieved, such as by expanding the federal Medicare program to cover everyone. To do so, however, would have required neutralizing the enormous power of the insurance companies with a massive mobilization of the population against them and in favor of a comprehensive and universal health care program.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: health care, health care reform, single-payer, medicare, american health care

Dr. Vicente Navarro is Professor of Health Policy, Public Policy, and Policy Studies at the Johns Hopkins University. He has written extensively on economics, health, and social policy, and has been advisor to many governments and international agencies. The views expressed in this article are his own, but are shared by millions across the United States.

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


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:
I have a better idea
Posted by: rickiey on Mar 14, 2008 8:39 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The ACTUAL problem, is that we are spending more than we need to on health care, because of ludicrous requirements, i.e. prescriptions.

Be honest: Most mothers can recognize strep throat, and know the proper dosages and use of antibiotics. A realistic price for antibiotics alone, is $10.

If a mother could look at her kid's throat, measure the fever, and go buy some, the total cost for strep throat, would be $10.

What is it now? Now there must be a doctor visit, $20 copay, with insurance forking over another $80, then it's off to the pharmacy to pay another $15 copay and have the insurance chip in another $25. (Presciptions themselves create overhead for the pharmacy, and the pharmaceutical manufacturer).

Minimum strep throat cost: $140.

Perhaps if the government were less interested in trying to protect the common people from themselves, we could afford the government helping with the insurance for things that ruin people's lives, like cancer, diabetes and congenital heart defects.

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

» RE: I have a better idea Posted by: simplisticton
» RE: I have a better idea Posted by: hrmcouncil
» RE: I have a better idea Posted by: DropTheOBomb
» RE: I have a better idea Posted by: walldodger1969
» RE: I have a better idea Posted by: dgleason
» Hubris Posted by: aethr
» RE: Hubris Posted by: yellow
» RE: Hubris Posted by: dgleason
» RE: I have a better idea Posted by: rwday@cox.net
» RE: I have a better idea Posted by: herronsmith
Simple: Medicare for everyone ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Mar 24, 2008 12:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As it stands now government pays around 50% of the nations health care bill anyway. Medicare, Medicaid,Schip,muni, state, local, federal, armed forces, vets ... you get the idea. Governments share will only increase in the future as the population gets older and poorer.

Medicare is already in place, trusted and popular ... what could be easier?

Furthermore this changeover will help cities, states, school districts and other government agencies throuugh the rough patch we certainly have ahead by offloading a sizable portion of their budget. For business it is a boon and for the uninsured or self payers a god send.

It is time, past time, for healthcare for all.

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

» Medicare IMPROVED for Everyone Posted by: bthespoon
» Medicare IMPROVED for Everyone Posted by: bthespoon
» AARP sells health insurance now Posted by: bthespoon
» "Medicare IMPROVED for All" Posted by: bthespoon
Thanks To Billary and Bush
Posted by: NoPCZone on Mar 24, 2008 1:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks to Billary blowing a great chance at the start of the Clinton Administration and the massive debt racked up by BushCo and the NeoCons, I doubt we will see what we need anytime soon. As a healthcare worker I know firsthand the desperate need for a universal single payer plan, but don't see much hope. Short of a complete meltdown of the current system I think the politicians are too timid to do the right thing.

That seems to be the modern American mode of change- ignore the problem until it threatens to overwhelm us. American healthcare is badly broken and is on life support in many huge parts of our country.

Many rural and urban safety-net hospitals are reeling under the strain and are sinking fast even as large private regional referral hospitals cherry-pick their way to prosperity at the expense of the rest of the nations healthcare system. As the for profit private hospitals install marble gilded atriums, skylights and food courts the rest are having a hard time paying the basic ongoing costs of the business. When they are gone it will cost many times as much to fix the problem.

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

» RE: Thanks To Billary and Bush Posted by: herronsmith
» Medicare is NOT Single Payer Posted by: NoPCZone
go out of the USA
Posted by: richholland on Mar 24, 2008 2:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
many years americans come to Chiangmai Thailand where american trained doctors provide you with the best medicare for 10% of the costs in the USA.

Nowadays a doctor told me that some american insurance companies?? allready give to their patients;
-medical costs refund
- flight ticket
-recovery time in a good hotel.

I fear that some alternat readers think about the poor american doctors and will never do such an unpatriotic thing

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

» RE: go out of the USA Posted by: ProgressiveManiac
» RE: go out of the USA Posted by: richholland
» Up-front costs? Posted by: ProgressiveManiac
» RE: go out of the USA Posted by: richholland
» DUH................ Posted by: gellero
» RE: DUH................ Posted by: richholland
Passionate But Misguided
Posted by: drricklippin on Mar 24, 2008 5:27 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr Navarro talks about "getting to the root of the problem"

My take on that root is that many Americans have been duped by organized medicine into believing they need it?

Much of what we do in organized medicine has little bearing on health outcomes.Even worse than not being effiective we harm many people.

I am actually for single payer but with much more emphasis on individual (health promotion) and institutional (public health) prevention.

Below is my #8 point plan that I first published in 1985 (revised after Katrina)

GROW UP AMERICA-A HEALTH CARE PLAN FOR ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS- proposed by Richard. A Lippin MD*

-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

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

» RE: Passionate But Misguided Posted by: ilsewdm
» RE: Passionate But Misguided Posted by: drricklippin
» RE: Passionate But Misguided Posted by: herronsmith
Sensible the Enemy of Pragmatic?
Posted by: ProgressiveManiac on Mar 24, 2008 5:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Any sensible person lacking a major investment in the insurance or pharmaceutical industries would like to see this country move to a single-payer system, and I am sure that includes Obama and probably Clinton as well. However anyone who was an adult in the early 1990's will recall the forceful propaganda and arm-twisting that the insurance and pharmaceutical industries launched to keep us from having any national health care plan. We can anticipate a serious battle over any change to the current system that is the source of so much wealth for these particular industries.

John Edwards proposed a plan that has been largely adopted by both Obama and Clinton. Although Edwards' plan is not a single-payer system, it avoids some of the serious political pitfalls of a single-payer system and at the same time would probably lead to a single-payer system in time. Hopefully, this would be in a short time.

Edwards' idea was to allow people to keep their current insurance-based plan if they were happy with it and they were allowed to move to another private insurance plan if they wanted to. People would have choice, undercutting the likely industry propaganda that the government was telling individuals what to do.

However, Edwards also included the provision that people would also have the option of purchasing a government managed plan similar to Medicare. The concept is that the government plan would be relatively so attractive that most people would abandon their private insurance plan in favor of the government plan and in effect, there would be a single-payer health care system that would evolve.

Of course the way to hell is paved with good intentions and there are certainly pitfalls in this clever plan of Edwards. One pitfall is that the plan does not immediately adopt a single-payer approach and that will raise opposition to the plan from the most idealistic, who insist on having an ideal plan immediately.

Another pitfall is one that Edwards' plan has in common with any single-payer plan is that conservative forces, should they come to power, will no doubt seek to strangle the effort in the guise of fiscal responsibility.

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

Hypocritical Doctors
Posted by: Roger Király on Mar 24, 2008 6:49 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For many years, MDs were happy to comply with health insurance companies and were also actively engaged (through the AMA) in fighting against "socialized medicine". Only when the HMOs started dictating to doctors how their practices should be run did MDs start protesting against them. Their protests were based on how their own lives were being affected, not on how their patients' lives were being negatively impacted by the insurance companies.

As the clinical psychologist Bruce Levine has written:

"Now that doctors are experiencing the demoralization of being put out of control by institutional forces, they've at least caught a glimpse of what most of their patients habitually face. Long before doctors were shackled with mind-numbling paperwork and found themselves schmoozing the managed care police, their patients were feeling humiliated, out of control, and stressed by an institutional society. Now when doctors see patients with the physical and psychological symptoms of this kind of stress, they recall their own. Maybe in addition to ordering lab tests and writing prescriptions, doctors will take seriously the heteronomy in their patients' lives---perhaps actually talk to them about it. Instead of whining, it's time for doctors to admit that it was their greed that gave HMOs the political opportunity to enslave them and everybody else."

As far as what can be done NOW about fixing the system, please read "A Second Opinion: Rescuing America's Health Care/A Plan for Universal Coverage Serving Patients Over Profit" by Arnold S. Relman, M.D. Dr. Relman's plan goes far beyond the financing of medical care; it also addresses the crucial issue of quality of care. Simply changing how poor-quality medical care is paid for will not improve the health of the nation. As Relman says, "To develop a universal health care system that provides quality care at a cost we can afford to live with, we must change not only our system of insuring and paying for health care, but also the way we organize and deliver that care."

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

» Agreed, BUT... Posted by: bthespoon
» RE: Agreed, BUT... Posted by: Roger Király
» moronic Posted by: gellero
» Buy a Dictionary Posted by: Roger Király
Of course the Democrats plan will fail
Posted by: antiapathy on Mar 24, 2008 7:22 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Dems are spineless. They rolled over on Iraq, and they will give up the fight for a watered-down health care plan that doesn't fix anything when the Republicans threaten to filibuster.

As a matter of fact, the battle for single-payer health care was lost when the Dems kicked Kucinich out of the debates.

I don't understand how so-called progressives can support such a corrupt and spineless party. They sell out their values because they don't think a candidate who upholds those values is "electable". Even when the majority of the country wants things like single-payer and an immediate end to the occupation of Iraq.

It's time for the Green Party.

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

» spoiler effect Posted by: Tom Tele
Another Edwards supporter: Gone Green
Posted by: Andie927 on Mar 24, 2008 8:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Edwards represented several of my main Issues, Which are Corporations ARE NOT People, and have no Rights! (That in and of itself, would solve a bunch of problems) Jobs, (bringing back)Tariffs, Real Healthcare not Insurance, our Elected Representative serving US not their Coprorate Masters!

Unfortunately, the 'Public' got blinded by race & gender and making history!

Now, I'm going Green! The Green Party Platform supports these same issues, it's the ONLY choice left for me.

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

» What about Ralph? Posted by: bthespoon
"Health Insurance" is fraud
Posted by: pangolin on Mar 24, 2008 11:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only beneficiary of "Health Insurance" plans are insurance company executives. The patients benefits are minimized and the stockholders profits never seem to turn into dividends. Meanwhile the CEO, the board, and the top tier crony executives of these companies have multiple ways of boosting their individual compensation into the tens of millions yearly.

It's a sweet gig too as the health insurance industry absolves itself of responsibility for anyone over 65, anyone hurt on the job and anybody hurt in an auto accident. After they refuse to pay for anybody who could be mentally ill or used recreational drugs or with a pre-existing condition it becomes pretty clear why they have private jets and we die untreated.

As far as I'm concerned if every health insurance executive was lined up against a wall and shot I wouldn't shed a tear. These people are the worst sort of capitalistic vultures that have created the ongoing financial collapse. Universal, single-payer, healthcare works and is cheaper and more effective. It is only the ability of these companies to broadcast outright lies and deny public forums to those who tell the truth that they get away with it.

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

The Actual Problem is
Posted by: Ohjin on Mar 24, 2008 11:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Profit has it's place.

One place it DOES NOT BELONG is in ANY aspect of HEALTHCARE.

If your top concern is profit, go ply your trade on Wall Street. A lot more sport in that, than profiting from the sick and dying.

I remember when Doctors came to my house, when they were far more concerned with people's health, and less concerned with profits from illness.

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

Free health care
Posted by: technocrat on Mar 24, 2008 12:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the moneyless, debt-free social program of a Technate, as proposed by Technocracy, health care would be a right of citizenship. Without the interference of profit or monetary considerations of any kind, preventive medicine would be priority #1, with free annual physical exams to every citizen.

As it stands now, medical care is a saleable commodity, just like diamonds or rutabagas. Only those who can afford it are considered deserving of it. Medical insurance was devised by doctors to guarantee themselves to be paid, and has evolved into the gargantuan mess it is now. Any attempt at health care under a price system will not address the exorbitant costs of this "how badly do you need it" system of commodity valuation, it will simply shuffle it off to the next sucker able to foot the bill. Doctors will still pay huge sums for medical school and malpractice insurance and will continue to want enough income to invest in their strip malls and condos in Vail. It's a cultural thing.

Get money out of the way. wwwtechnocracyinc.org

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

Democrats should demand Single Payer Health Care for Vote..!
Posted by: TJ-stars4peace on Mar 24, 2008 4:15 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's about time some of us knew this all along Edwards plan was the best but even that feel short..!

Why is any Democrat supporting these two characters when neither will support, Single Payer Health Care or get the corrupt murdering Insurance companies out of our Health care system for good..!

All Obama says as to Single Payer Health care is "No We Can't.."

Well Barack; if you can't, then maybe I should run because I can..and if you had my background you could to, plus if you cared about America's economy our industries what's left of it and our competitiveness in the world you'd know Single Payer Health Care would do wonders to bolster our nations businesses both national and international it would promote commerce and stimulate our suffering economy..!

I will not vote for any candidate who does not support and endorse Single Payer Health Care..!

I was always and Edwards/Kucinich supporter anyway..and Edwards only got 1 50th of the media time Hillary did, since these experts were all so sure she was a lock shoe in yada yada and now look at the mess we've got on our hands..

If Democrats were smart they would demand that either of these individuals who think they should be the leader of the free world numero uno endorse and promote and promise Single Payer Health Care..!

Demand it..demand Single Payer Health Care, The Insurance companies are a fraud and 32-38% of all our Health Care costs go to them..these corrupt immoral Insurance companies that have both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in their pockets..!

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

» What about Ralph? Posted by: bthespoon
It's not about us...
Posted by: TagsNOLA on Mar 24, 2008 4:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... It's about the insurance companies and THEIR rights. The best plan would be to bypass everything private and set up a national public health care system with publicly owned hospitals, publicly owned medical schools and a publicly owned pharmaceutical industry.

Under the current system, it is about profit. I'm all for the profit motive in most aspects of the economy, but not in such activities as health care.

My boss did everything right. He had health insurance and went to a respected private hospital where they let die due to patient neglect.

I went to a VA hospital where they treated my cancer, saving my life. My care was as good as anybody could ask for. Any inadequacies in the VA system are not for lack of the VA's commitment to get the job done. They are from lack of funding. But don't tell ME the government doesn't know how to run a hospital.

And get this! When the VA hospital here in New Orleans was shut down due to Hurricane Katrina, I went to the VA Hospital in Houston and they had my VA medical record in their computers! I asked the triage clerk if the same would be true at any other VA hospital or was this just some special Hurricane Katrina contingency? No. The triage clerk told me that it's SOP that veterans' medical records are available throughout the entire VA hospital system!

Soooo, let's just take the VA model and apply it to the rest of the population and make sure that it is adequately funded.

TagsNOLA

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

» Owned by the State: Posted by: gellero
» RE: It's not about us... Posted by: richholland
High paid health executives
Posted by: Jersey Devil on Mar 24, 2008 9:29 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Go to guidestar.com and check out the CEO, COO, CFO salaries of executives from non-profit healthcare providers. Six and seven figure salaries are the norm for these leeches.

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

"insurance industry profits reached $12 billion"
Posted by: bthespoon on Mar 25, 2008 6:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read $54 billion, and that's profits after paying CEO salaries, stock holder dividends, etc. Sorry I can't remember where I read it for documentation purposes.

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

» GREAT article Posted by: bthespoon
While we fiddle
Posted by: bthespoon on Mar 25, 2008 7:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...over 100,000 innocent, involuntary Americans will die, millions more will be either bankrupted, disabled, and/or live in stress and terror over paying medical bills, and at least $350 billion of our health care dollars will be diverted away from desperately needed care...each and every year. Enough is enough already, and four more years is WAY too long to allow this to continue.

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

Use the new Presidential/dictatorial power!
Posted by: Tom Tele on Mar 25, 2008 10:02 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Now that Bush has expanded the power of the Presidency into a kind of elected King the next Democratic president should just abolish the Insurance industry for health care. Republicans go along with the Bush expansion but it is right to use it to cause some good. Otherwise the insurance company money will pollute and stall any decent solution. The insurance industry is legal extortion and should be as illegal as loansharking or selling crack. All it would take is an executive order. Of course the spineless Dems will probably never do this but it is what is needed. We do need to re-prioritze our health care away form the end of life, Americans need to take better care of themselves and all but Insurance mafias need to be criminalized and the legislative process is too corrupt.

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

It's the Money...
Posted by: Bearzerker on Mar 30, 2008 3:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... always was, and always will be...

when it should be about compassion, empathy and social costs...

yeah social costs also have dollar connotations but... in real dollars actual costs in a single desk, supply and demand healthcare system [multiple models abound] is so cost effective that I'm surprised that corporations aren't demanding single desk healthcare reform... just in order to BOOST their bottom lines...

this would be a win win political situation too...
as it subsidizes business's bottom line with a "like a tax break effect" while also giving affordable coverage to all citizens...

why the political & corporate establishment hasn't backed a political runner for a simplified plan, dazes and confuses me still...

whats more...it's the real story behind MSM mismanagement and the infotainment of the news industry... what a sorry world you people live in!

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