Single Payer

..."people would come into the public program because the public program would be substantially more efficient".
.
Please explain or ask how will a public insurance program be more efficient? Simply saying that it is so, does not make it so.
.
And, you along with the other "single payer government run health insurance" proponents will need the working group of employees who have very good insurance coverage to help pay for the public one payer programs. Without that group, single payer is not viable.
.
However I will agree, like in Cananda. For a single payer public government insurance program to work, you will also need to ration care to everyone to make it cost effective. So, if you have cancer or some other chronic debilitating disease, forget about getting the care you need. You simply just need to die and go away.

I think Sen Sanders is spot on. The entrenched interests in the Senate who love Big Pharma/Health/Insurance trifecta's money will not play. Better to try it out in Vermont or some state where the vested interests are not heavily tilted against the interests of the less well off.

The Canadian resistance to govt run health ran along the same lines and a socialist government in Sasketchwan said" bugger the Feds, we will do it ourselves". Now one can selectively point to three hard cases in Canada out of a population of 27 million to show how health care by govt is not working. But no one in Canada's has declared bankruptcy because of the cost of health care. We in the US find that 70% of all bankruptcies arise out of health care costs. We are a great country, are we not?

I asked a Canadian friend about his own experience as he recovered from surgery. He told me his doctor has prescribed Biaxin for a chest condition and the pharmacist told him the health program allowed for a generic costing 60% less. The generic is produced by the same company marketing Biaxin. What gives??? How much more does giving a pill a fancy name cost?

Rusty: If you can point to evidence, not TV ads by a guy who was fined $1.7 billion for insurance fraud in his hospital empire, that Canada's "rations" health care let us see it. If you really want to see how health care is delivered in Canada check out an isolated outpost like Iqaluit. You will be surprised by the quality. My cousin is the Administrator there; and she works under the most rigorous condition in respect of the climate. Yet the hospital is as good as any in the rest of Canada.

sevenoaks07 Says:
Friday, June 5, 2009 at 8:45 am
"But no one in Canada's has declared bankruptcy because of the cost of health care. We in the US find that 70% of all bankruptcies arise out of health care costs".
.
So stated another way, "But no one in Canada has declared bankruptcy, but never-the-less died from inadequate care. Hmmm, let me see. I will die, but I will not go bankrupt. Brilliant! This solves all of our problems. My heirs will be very happy that is for sure.

KT:
.
The House is not going to pass one; the Senate is not going to pass one; President Obama is not pushing for one.
.
Why?
.
(thanks for the link to the Sanders interview)

sevenoaks: it is SOP to distort health information by proponets. We choose the evidence that supports our thesis. I think Sanders has it right. Things get started is at the state level. Once people see a single payer system actually working then the one case of my relative dying because... whether in Canada, Britain or France.. becomes moot. It is unrealistic to have a national program in, even had our financial situtaion been better. Our govt is bought and paid for by special interests. And they have much of the Senate and a significant part of Congress sewn up.

sevenoaks07 Says:
Friday, June 5, 2009 at 8:56 am
Rusty: If you can point to evidence,

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2001977834_cihak13.html
.
"In 1999, Dr. Richard F. Davies described how delays affected Ontario heart patients scheduled for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. In a single year, just for this one operation, 71 Ontario patients died before surgery, "121 were removed from the list permanently because they had become medically unfit for surgery" and 44 left the province to have their CABG surgery elsewhere, often in the U.S."
.
http://www.americanissuesproject.org/blogs/columns/archive/2009/05/22/the-looming-fight-over-health-care-rationing.aspx
.
So what would a government run health care system look like? Probably much like Medicare. That's a chilling prospect since that system is now in serious financial trouble and facing a $34 trillion unfunded liability. That means it is going to have to find ways to make serious cuts in costs. How is that going to happen? The same way other countries with universal health care systems find cost savings: through rationing, waiting lists, and decreased quality of care.
.
And then there is this:
http://www.civitas.org.uk/nhs/download/Canada.pdf
"Rationing : “Everything is Free but Nothing is Readily Available” (Frogue et al, 2001)
Like other nations experiencing limitless demand, an ageing population and the costly advance of medical technology, Canada has faced pressure to control health expenditure. It has done so through explicit rationing. Set up in 1989, the Canadian Co-ordinating Office for Health Technology Assessment is the Canadian predecessor to our NICE, charged with exactly the same brief and, it seems, carrying out its function in the same way. For example, in the case of new cancer treatment, the latest pharmaceuticals (such as visudyne for macular degeneration), and high-tech diagnostic tests, Canadian governments simply reduce their expenses by limiting the service. Such a method of rationing is only possible in a single-payer monopoly. Medicare also shares other defining characteristics of monopolies: limited information, little transparency and poor accountability.

.
Should I stop or continue to cite the sources for you sevenoaks?

KT - thanks for the link to the Sanders interview. Bernie is a serious legislator, and being independent sometimes gives him a freer hand, perhaps, to pursue what he thinks is right. He is a relentless champion for the poor.
.
A small state really could be a model for universal health care of the single payer sort. In Vermont every child is covered, and every woman receives care if she wants it during pregnancy. A stepped program makes health insurance available at relatively low cost for low income Vermonters.
.
Bernie has championed local health clinics and especially dental clinics, recognizing that poor teeth can keep people from getting jobs and staying involved in their communities.
.
This is another story that might interest you on Bernie's views, from Politico this January:
.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17704.html

The reason is that it is not going to pass.
.
LOL. O' course it's not - thanks in large part to right-wing enablers like you who steadfastly keep it out of public debate!

And on a personal note, I also have family in Canada as well. British Columbia as a matter of fact which also imposes now a "premimum" or individual tax imposed to cover costs. Even with this "premimum" my 7 year old grand neice had to wait 42 weeks for a tonsillectomy. She suffered through multiple throat and ear infections due to the wait-time, and after I did an assessment on her recently, found that she now has a permanent hearing loss that could have been prevented had she had the surgery in a timely manner.

Rusty: you are engaging in the usual shell game. For every case or article you can point to I can quote one where prompt medical care saved lives. That is not the point. You are against a public health service and you find your reasons for it. I am for public health care and I find reasons to support my position.

But until you can find me 13 and a half million people who are having all kind of problems in Canada I see you for what you are: a partisan. And I am one too. Unfortunately your relatives all seem to be having a problem with their health provider. Perhaps you should bring them to the US so that they can get immediate treatment with your help.

sevenoaks07:
.
Rusty doesn't ascribe to the consensus. I saw an article linked to by a commenter a while back (maybe it was even you) about 10 myths of the single payer system in Canada.
.
I can tell you from experience, being of the right age, the right surroundings (average Americans - not Rusty's concept of "real" Americans) to be able to take no less than four cases I know of personally that have lead to bankruptcy or death, or impending death, due to the nature of our system.
.
My guess is that Rusty takes his buttsnakes, gilds them, and sells them to unsuspecting libruls as gold.
.
Funny there are no buyers...
.
On the more serious side, I don't see any projections as to who, of the uninsured (that 47 million number is now old) will get a shot at health care like the rest of us and what others of us, as payers into the corrupt system we have now (all joking about "efficiency" aside) will see.
.
Amy, what will happen on the ground?.
.
I do not care even for a second about whether is thought of as this or that or the other thing.

No sevenoaks it is very clear that you do not like to read the evidence I cited, and you want a government run program which is proven to not work. Not only in Canada, but in all of the European socialist-like countries and Japan.
.
I agree that it is a crime that the once richest nation in the world is not able to provide a means for the less fortunate to afford or have health care. I also know that the socialist programs being offered up as the cure-all, end-all for the lack of our government to provide for its destitute citizens is to lump us all into one inefficient, ineffective and poorly managed government program. Why, because without the private insurance covered citizens, the government backed programs will never be viable. It will be an endless money pit like all the other social-welfare programs.
.
Yes you may avoid bankruptcy which is the only legitimate opposition to private healthcare in my opinion, but what does that leave you with? I see many many people who will go without necessary treatment and tests due to government rationing of care in order to cut costs. I for one do not want to see us take that risk. When Obama gets his wish for universal healthcare, perhaps the justice of this new system will be when his own daughters go without needed care. Then maybe he will see first hand what universal healthcare really costs.

Rusty, there are lots of Americans who are told, essentially, "just die and go away." Have you never seen those pathetic collection jars on the check-out counter at local stores: "Please help! My daughter (son, husband, father,etc.) needs a kidney (heart, lung, etc.) transplant, and our insurance will not cover it (or we have no insurance)." America might indeed have the best health care system in the world (I'm not convinced of that), but that quality means nothing to someone who can't access it. Either/all sides can present horror stories, but I'm not sure that that's the best way to craft public policy.

And as usual, "Phifty's" contribution to a very serious topic of discussion is with "gilded butt-snakes". But in reality his stupidity is only clearly shown with his total lack of knowledge which he attempts to represent with his funny 3rd grade name-calling tactics.
.
Want a "butt-snake" Phifty? That is clearly all you know anyways, non-sensical child-like babble.

The reason is that it is not going to pass.
.
Humbug!
.
There is incessant coverage of any number of policies that are not only not going to get passed, but have also been covered so thoroughly that there is nothing new to be said. SS "privatization," overturning Roe v Wade, a "flat tax," deficit reduction, and on and on.
.
The constant reprisal of these right wing issues has the effect of shifting the Overton Window. The refusal to air left wing policy issues like single payer health plans, dramatic reductions in military spending, termination of covert CIA operations that undermine governments, an end to warrantless wiretapping, anti-trust actions against telecom and other colluding oligopolies et alia means that these issues,and their merits, are never discussed in public spheres. Air and print is used to push President Gingrich's positions, and for Cheney's daughter to repeat her father's lies.

Rusty, I don't have anything but insults reserved for you. You're a racist and a scumbag, and will never address you in any other manner.
.
Such is my "gratitude"...
.
As for the health care system:
"I see many many people who will go without necessary treatment and tests due to government rationing of care in order to cut costs."
.
You talk about a tonsillectomy. I talk about four cases, among average Americans, whom I know personally, who have run into calamity under the current system. One of them is ongoing.
.
As for serious convesation, I'll have one with you Rusty, when you specifically admit your racist connections and beliefs, and publically disavow them, and conduct conversations with others here based on respect, and not one minute before.

georgiac, I have stated on previous threads that our current system is flawed, and many under/un-insured go wanting for decent healthcare. I do not think any sane person will argue that point at all.
.
As I have suggested before, create a government backed health insurance that people under the age of 62 can pay into with an affordable premium. I have no argument with that what-so-ever. The question is then what other social welfare programs do you want to give up in order to fund this type of "insurance"?
.
Maybe it is as simple as passing a law that requires ALL employers to provide health insurance for their respective employees. Maybe, oh my God, maybe the Government could also give a tax break to those companies so that they can afford to give their employees health insurance under a good group plan. But in this world we have the lobbyists and such who will get this type of program voted down. The far left will vote it down for more big government spending programs. The right will vote it down because of the big business interests, and the need for bigger and higher profits. Hopefully there will be a happy medium that will provide for those in need, and we no longer need to see your "jars at the checkout counters" for a kidney transplant.

I think the crooks are even now shifting to where they know they are going to have to include a public plan, but they are going to make it terrible by either forcing all the sickest and poorest Americans toward it, not letting it use its' size to negotiate costs, etc. Then when it sucks they will say "see I told you so". Meanwhile we will still be fighting through denials of service for routine treaments and figuring out what is "in" and "out" of network.

In reference to the above quote from Rusty's "book of ignorance*" and point out that that is very common.
.
In the one ongoing case, it has lead to an instance of terminal oates-cell carcinoma and a much, much higher medical bill to be borne by the taxpayer than would have happened had this individual been able to access health care from the git-go.
.
THAT is the reality of our system. And yes, not only is this intelligent conversation, with real life cases which completely obliterate some of the more ignorant sentiments about health care, but it shows how life and death hangs in the balance.
.
*we would call this "knowledge", but Rusty don't got none, neether.

@rustyreturns
.
You cited a Seattle Times article, but that was written by one of those nuts at the Discovery Institute. That is the same group that wants to teach Creationism as scientifically viable alternative to creationism.
.
The second article you cite is from a woman named Kim Priestap. She isn't a health care expert. In fact, her bio lists her as a business owner.
.
If you want us to buy what you are selling can you'll need to cite some evidence and facts gathered from qualified, non-crazy people.
.
The story of your niece, while tragic, isn't evidence that Canada's health care system is worse than the US. For every one story like that in Canada there are 10 more of those from the US. The reason we in the reality based world appreciate the Canadian system is that it provides a higher % of Canadians health care than the US "system" provides to US citizens. And it does it at a far lower per capita cost than what Canada pays.

Karen, you say you don't include Single Payer in your stories because it won't pass.
.
So, does that mean you have NEVER covered an issue/policy position that wasn't going to pass?
.
If so, why did you cover it then but refuse to cover Single Payer now?

choska:
.
Between me, my wife, and my best friend, we number 30 in our immediate families. I am 55, and the others are of similar age. The cross section includes everyone from moderately high income Americans to those who don't have a lot - the working poor.
.
The one case I just cited above concerns a diagnosis made only last week at Harborview Medical Center, right here. One last year, which I mentioned before on these threads, culminated in a $515,000 bill ($40,000 after all was done with charities, etc) for a guy who became unemployed from a job that paid $14 / hour w/ no benefits.
.
The others I won't elaborate on, but because of the number of us who are of the age where medical issues come to the fore, there is no question that there will be more cases of calamity just like the one I mentioned.
.
This is why I asked Amy Sullivan (it's actually Karen Tumulty) what is going on on the ground, because we are going to see a lot more of this...

KT
.
In your response to Stuart, you left out the motivation behind Kristol's famous memo--that a simple, single payer plan would be immensely popular, marginalizing Republicans in the same way FDR's Social Security program did. That is, there is a significant number of Republicans who opposed effective health care reform because they think effective health care policies is bad for the GOP.
.
We are also seeing this effect in Republicans refusing to participate in any kind of constructive way to come up with effective policies in any policy realm. Choosing obstruction, and sometimes deliberate malevolence, places party ahead of country, and ahead of their constituents.