Today, Monday July 20, the silence in the House of Representatives around single payer and H.R. 676 will end. Rep. Anthony Weiner, (D-NY09), who has already rankled Republicans and Blue Dogs with his no-nonsense statements before the House Energy and Commerce hearing on H.R. 3200, will move to amend the current bill. His proposal is essentially to replace H.R. 3200 with H.R. 676—single payer Medicare for All.
This exciting and potentially monumental move needs our support. We pushed Rep. Dennis Kucinich's amendment to victory last Friday, and we can do it for Representative Weiner, too.
The full committee and its five subcommittees are spending the next three days debating the bill and performing their markups. This is the time to act, and Representative Weiner is making his move.
Call or fax the committee members and tell them you want them to support Representative Weiner's proposal. Listen to his blunt analysis in Friday's session of what real healthcare reform is made of, and you'll get some good ideas of what to say when you call or fax. It's a no-holds-barred, take-no-prisoners approach to the legislative process almost never heard on the House floor.
Energy and Commerce Committee Phone: (202) 225-2927, Fax: (202) 225-2525
Henry A. Waxman, CA, Chair Phone: (202) 225-3976, Fax: (202) 225-4099
John D. Dingell, MI Phone: (202) 225-4071, Fax: (202) 226-0371
Edward J. Markey, MA Phone: (202) 225-2836, Fax: (202) 226-0092
Rick Boucher, VA Phone: (202) 225-3861, Fax: (202) 225-0442
Frank Pallone, Jr., NJ Phone: (202) 225-4671, Fax: (202) 225-9665
Bart Gordon, TN Phone: (202) 225-4231, Fax: (202) 225-6887
Bobby L. Rush, IL Phone: (202) 225-4372, Fax: (202) 226-0333
Anna G. Eshoo, CA Phone: (202) 225-8104, Fax: (202) 225-8890
Bart Stupak, MI Phone: (202) 225-4735, Fax: (202) 225-4744
Eliot L. Engel, NY Phone: (202) 225-2464, Fax: (202) 225-5513
Gene Green, TX Phone: (202) 225-1688, Fax: (202) 225-9903
Diana DeGette, CO Phone: (202) 225-4431, Fax: (202) 225-5657
Lois Capps, CA Phone: (202) 225-3601, Fax: (202) 225-5632
Mike Doyle, PA Phone: (202) 225-2135, Fax: (202) 225-3084
Jane Harman, CA Phone: (202) 225-8220, Fax: (202) 226-7290
Jan Schakowsky, IL Phone: (202) 225-2111, Fax: (202) 226-6890
Charles A. Gonzalez, TX Phone: (202) 225-3236, Fax: (202) 225-1915
Jay Inslee, WA Phone: (202) 225-6311, Fax: (202) 226-1606
Tammy Baldwin, WI Phone: (202) 225-2906, Fax: (202) 225-6942
Mike Ross, AR Phone: (202) 225-3772, Fax: (202) 225-1314
Anthony D. Weiner, NY Phone: (202) 225-6616, Fax: (202) 226-0218
Jim Matheson, UT Phone: (202) 225-3011, Fax: (202) 225-5638
G.K. Butterfield, NC Phone: (202) 225-3101, Fax: (202) 225-3354
Charlie Melancon, LA Phone: (202) 225-4031, Fax: (202) 226-3944
John Barrow, GA Phone: (202) 225-2823, Fax: (202) 225-3377
Baron P. Hill, IN Phone: (202) 225-5315, Fax: (202) 226-6866
Doris O. Matsui, CA Phone: (202) 225-7163, Fax: (202) 225-0566
Donna M. Christensen, VI Phone: (202) 225-1790, Fax: (202) 225-5517
Kathy Castor, FL Phone: (202) 225-3376, Fax: (202) 225-5652
John P. Sarbanes, MD Phone: (202) 225-4016, Fax: (202) 225-9219
Christopher S. Murphy, CT Phone: (202) 225-4476, Fax: (202) 225-5933
Zachary T. Space, OH Phone: (202) 225-6265, Fax: (202) 225-3394
Jerry McNerney, CA Phone: (202) 225-1947, Fax: (202) 225-4060
Betty Sutton, OH Phone: (202) 225-3401, Fax: (202) 225-2266
Bruce L. Braley, IA Phone: (202) 225-2911, Fax: (202) 225-6666
Peter Welch, VT Phone: (202) 225-4115, Fax: (202) 225-6790
Check out PDA's Healthcare for All Issue Organizing Team (IOT) pages for recent news on healthcare reform and single payer, as well as resources on legislation and issues.
In solidarity,
Tim Carpenter, National Director
Laura Bonham, Deputy Director
Conor Boylan, Field Coordinator
On Friday, the single payer movement had a victory when the Education and Labor Committee voted to include language allowing single payer at the state level. This is an important breakthrough. Canada got its single payer system on a national level by showing it worked on the state level.
Now, we have an even more important vote coming up this week. Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) will introduce, in the Energy and Commerce Committee, an amendment that abolishes private insurance and creates a national single-payer system that would cover everyone. This amendment would substitute Rep. John Conyers' (D-MI) single-payer bill, HR 676, for the current Tri-Committee Health Reform Bill.
Click here to send a letter to the Energy & Commerce Committee to support Rep. Weiner's single payer amendment.
If your representative is a member of the Committee, please call him or her today. Members of Energy & Commerce Committee can be found at: http://energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=160&Itemid=61. The Congressional Switchboard can be reached at 800-473-6711 or 202-225-3121.
If your representative is not a member, please call Committee Chair Henry Waxman at 202-225-3976 and ask him to support the amendment.
Following is a list of talking points you can use:
HR 676 expands and greatly improves Medicare for everyone residing in the U. S.
HR 676 would cover every person for all necessary medical care including prescription drugs, hospital, surgical, outpatient services, primary and preventive care, emergency services, dental, mental health, home health, physical therapy, rehabilitation (including for substance abuse), vision care, hearing services including hearing aids, chiropractic, durable medical equipment, palliative care, and long term care.
HR 676 ends deductibles and co-payments. HR 676 would save hundreds of billions annually by eliminating the high overhead and profits of the private health insurance industry and HMOs.
Single payer provides people with the maximum choice. They will no longer be limited by the insurance or HMO "approved" list but rather will be able to pick their doctor, their hospital and their treatment.
The Democratic leadership bill, America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009, fails to control costs, does not provide health care for all, undermines the economy and makes job growth more difficult. "Affordable" health insurance in the Democratic bill means if you make $88,000 per year you will spend 19% of your income on health care that you are required to buy -- or you get additional taxes added to your tax bill. See http://www.prosperityagenda.us/node/866. And, it will choke the economy. Small businesses, $400,000 and up, will face a penalty of 8% of their payroll if they do not provide health insurance. How is that going to help avoid the jobless recovery that seems to be occurring? In fact, this provision ensures a jobless recovery. Single payer which would create 2.6 million new jobs, and infuse $317 billion in new business and public revenues, with another $100 billion in wages. Single payer would actually expand the economy and produce jobs rather than undermine it. See http://www.prosperityagenda.us/node/865
Urge every member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee to vote for the single payer amendment.
Click here to send a letter to the Committee. The Congressional Switchboard can be reached at 800-473-6711 or 202-225-3121.
Please forward this message widely. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Kevin Zeese
Executive Director
ProsperityAgenda.US
P.S. Please join us in Washington, DC on July 30th for Medicare's birthday and a lobby day for single payer. See http://www.healthcare-now.org/campaigns/single-payer-rally/ for more.
As the Obama administration pushes for a national health care plan, studies show that most Americans are overwhelmingly happy with their own health care -- but they are dissatisfied with the country's overall system, because most Americans who have insurance believe that those who don't have it are not receiving care.
Those same studies, however, show that a surprisingly large 70 percent of the estimated 46 million Americans who don't have insurance say they do, in fact, receive health care, and that a vast majority of them are satisfied with it.
A survey conducted jointly by the Kaiser Family Foundation, ABC News and USA Today, released in October 2006, found that 89 percent of Americans were satisfied with their own personal medical care, but only 44 percent were satisfied with the overall quality of the American medical system. The survey is the only recent poll for which data is publicly available that allows for a comparison of the satisfaction of insured and uninsured Americans. (The data from a just-completed New York Times/CBS poll won't be publicly available for several months; the results that have been reported so far don't make the comparisons discussed in this article.)
Those with recent serious health problems, possibly the people with the best knowledge of how health care is working, were generally the most satisfied. Ninety-three percent of insured Americans who had recently suffered a serious illness were satisfied with their health care. So were 95 percent of those who suffered from chronic illness.
President Obama, in his press conference on Tuesday, seemed to understand that degree of satisfaction. While promising to help people who are "out of luck" on insurance, he said: "If you like your plan and you like your doctor, you won't have to do a thing. You keep your plan; you keep your doctor. If your employer's providing you good health insurance, terrific. We're not going to mess with it."
But while insured Americans say overwhelmingly that they are satisfied, more than half of them -- 52 percent -- believe that becoming uninsured poses a "critical problem," 36 percent view the threat as "serious but not critical," and another 7 percent see it as a "problem, but not serious." Only 4 percent view it as "not much of a problem."
Uninsured Americans, not surprisingly, are not as satisfied as people who have insurance. Nonetheless, 70 percent of the uninsured who indicated their level of satisfaction said they were either "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their health care, and only 17.5 percent said they were "very dissatisfied."
Analysts say legislators should pay close attention before enacting a national health care plan.
"If the insured come to believe that the uninsured are not that dissatisfied with their health care, it is extremely important. It could throw a real wild card into the whole health care debate," Jack Calfee, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, told FOXNews.com.
"It is a common finding in public opinion research," Henry Aaron, a senior fellow for economic studies at the Brookings Institution, told FOXNews.com. "People are satisfied in the small, but dissatisfied in the large. People are satisfied with their child's teachers or school, but dissatisfied with schools generally.... They are satisfied with their doctor or their last visit to the hospital, but they are dissatisfied with what they perceive is happening with medical care as a whole. This finding is just one additional example."
The Kaiser/ABC News/USA Today survey found that about 13.4 percent of Americans were uninsured (a number slightly smaller than the 15.5 percent estimate used in policy debates from a Department of Labor survey). In crunching the numbers, since 13.4 percent multiplied by the 17.5 percent of the uninsured said that they were "very dissatisfied," it follows that out of all Americans, only 2.3 percent are both uninsured and "very dissatisfied" with the care they receive. The number rises to 3.9 percent when you include all the uninsured who are dissatisfied in any way with their health care.
To put those numbers differently, 5 million uninsured Americans are very dissatisfied with their health care. Including those dissatisfied in any way raises that to 8.4 million.
The survey of patient satisfaction also asked about the aspects of health care that dissatisfy Americans. The uninsured were most dissatisfied with their "ability to get the latest, most sophisticated medical treatments" (35 percent were "very dissatisfied"), followed by their ability to get non-emergency medical treatments without having to wait" (32 percent), and their "ability to see top-quality medical specialists, if you ever need one" (31 percent). At the other end, only 10 percent of the uninsured felt "very dissatisfied" with "the quality of their communication" with their doctor.
A majority of the uninsured are not desperately poor; about 60 percent of them have personal incomes over $50,000 per year and pay out of their own pockets when necessary, rather than paying for insurance. Others manage to obtain care at highly discounted rates as charity cases.
But there are two other reasons why most uninsured are satisfied: About 14 million of the "uninsured" qualify for Medicaid, and pre-existing conditions do not exclude people from joining the government program. As a result, many who are eligible for Medicaid wait until they need care to register, so they are effectively insured at all times even when they are not formally enrolled in the program.
In addition, once those who are already effectively covered by Medicaid are excluded, nearly 70 percent of the remaining uninsured are without insurance for less than four months. The large majority may be uninsured for such short periods of time that being uninsured is never relevant for their ability to get health care.
Under Obama's proposal, the government will provide insurance and determine the compensation doctors receive for different services, but doctors' offices and hospitals will still technically be privately run. Many Republicans claim that the subsidies and other advantages provided to government insurance would drive private insurance companies out of business. If so, Obama's proposal would be identical to Canada's health insurance program, so it is useful to compare Americans' satisfaction to Canadians'.
A May 2008 survey by Harris/Decima TeleVox asked Canadians the same questions that appeared in the Kaiser/ABC News/USA Today survey two years earlier. In most comparisons, Canadians were more satisfied than uninsured Americans, but just barely, and they were nowhere as satisfied as insured Americans. Canadians are most similar to insured Americans in terms of their happiness with their ability "to get non-emergency care without having to wait." While 77 percent of insured Americans and 41 percent of uninsured Americans were satisfied with timely non-emergency care, the figure for all Canadians was 60 percent.
Among the biggest differences between percentage of Canadians and insured Americans who were satisfied were the "ability to see top-quality medical specialists, if you ever need one" (26 percentage points difference) and the "ability to get emergency care" (24 percentage points difference).
Another comparison between the U.S. and Canada can be made in terms of how egalitarian the two systems are. That is, is there much difference in levels of happiness between people based on race, education, income, marital status, age, political views, or income? For both Americans and Canadians, higher incomes don't buy higher levels of satisfaction with their health care. In the U.S., there is no difference in happiness by race; blacks are just as satisfied as whites or Asians or Hispanics. Canadians do experience greater differences in happiness across provinces than Americans face across states.
There are certainly some cases in the U.S. where uninsured individuals end up spending much of their life-savings on health care. But only a very small minority of Americans are not covered by insurance and are simultaneously "very dissatisfied" or "dissatisfied" with the health care that they receive.
Sources:
-Uninsured Americans vs. Insured Canadians: Who is More Satisfied with Their Health Care? Oct. 15, 2008
-ABC News/USA TODAY/Kaiser Family Foundation health care poll Apr. 27, 2009
-President Obama press briefing June 23, 2009
-Household Income Rises, Poverty Rate Declines, Number of Uninsured Up Aug. 28, 2007
-Health-Reform Traps: Universal What? June 22, 2009
-Harris/Decima TeleVox poll on Canadian health care May 14, 2008
OVERHAULING OUR HEALTH CARE SYSTEM
http://weiner.house.gov/news_display.aspx?id=1325
Governors worried by healthcare bill costs
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2009/07/20/governors_balk_over_what_healthcare_bill_will_cost_states/?page=full
Surely all members of Congress and other elected and appointed government officials, past and present, and their families, federal and state, must be participants in any national health insurance plan, and should be subject to the same restrictions as citizens are.
It is irrelevant that Congress already has a health insurance plan; so do most citizens. To allow government officials, elected or appointed, to be exempt would be nothing short of elitist.
WHY CONGRESS IS EXEMPT FROM PUBLIC HEALTH INSURANCE
http://www.emaxhealth.com/1/72/32279/why-congress-exempt-public-health-insurance.html
The point in Government run health care that they are not telling you is that the government and not you and your doctor will ultimately decide which treatments you will receive and which treatments cost too much for society. I know I live with it. I have had treatments denied to me.
we as an industrial nation must find a suitable health-care plan that all legal and illegal usa residents pay their fair share of the costs for healthcare in this nation. one should never be denied health-care due to their status in this country.
President Barack Obama said on Tuesday the healthcare overhaul plan working its way through the U.S. Congress needs more work amid signs his top policy initiative, already rejected by Republicans, was running into deeper trouble with his own Democrats.
The Blue Dogs account for 51 of the 256 Democrats in the House and for seven members of the committee -- enough in either case to defeat legislation if they vote with Republicans.
Democratic defections on two House committees yesterday underscored divisions among the party's rank-and-file over the scope of reform, along with its massive price tag. The latest rebellion stirred among newly elected Democrats who are wary of the surtax on wealthy households that the House bill would impose -- a cudgel for Republicans, who portray the tax as a killer for small businesses.
Last night, Elmendorf had more bad news. Hours after Obama vowed that health reform would not expand the deficit over the next decade; the CBO reported that the House bill would increase the deficit by about $240 billion by 2019. A plan to expand insurance coverage to 37 million Americans would cost the government about $1.04 trillion, the CBO said. That would be partially offset by reductions in existing federal programs worth $219 billion and tax increases -- including a surtax on the wealthy -- worth about $583 billion.
In the House, 22 freshmen and sophomore Democrats wrote to Pelosi to protest the surtax on wealthy households that the House would adopt to fund nearly half of its estimated $1.2 trillion, 10-year bill. Under the plan, a 1 percent tax would kick in at $350,000 in annual household income and rise to 5.4 percent on incomes more than $1 million, but the group expressed concern that small businesses would be hit as well.
Surtax on the wealthy -- worth about $583 billion
Question 1: Just how many "wealthy" people are there in th United States?
Question 2: Based on the $583,000,000,000.00 figure, what would each "wealthy" person have to pay?
Is there a math expert that could answer this question?
Like Car Insurance, Health Coverage May Be Mandated
A Proposed Requirement That All Americans Have Policies Has Broad Support Among Reformers
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/21/AR2009072103410_pf.html
As I understand it there are two facts that are being totally ignored by the main stream media, and the congress.
1. 50% of those who are uninsured have turned down insurance at work.
2. 50% of those insured are financially able to purchase insurance yet have refused it.
Now that means that between 3 and 6 % of American could be uninsured, and a large percentage of those qualify for medicare or medicaid, but haven't applied.
My question is simple; why do we need health care reform? And of course just how accurate are these numbers?
25% of the uninsured are illegal aliens.
Lets also keep in mind that Medicare already sucks up over 40% of Ohio's budget. Extending Medicare to the rest of the citizens will take ALL of Ohio's budget. If you think the state budget cuts are bad now, just wait until EVERY state agency, program and function is completely eliminated to pay for this huge unfunded MANDATE from Congress.
Might as well say bye bye to not only the West library but to the entire library system if this should ever become law.
rr by your comments on this board you do not believe in helping anyone out but i know someone that is trying help you on your behalf for a donation by writing a letter concerning your rr museum. this person wrote a letter to an ind that has help many ind(s) with their dreams. i know this because i dropped this BEGGING LETTER off myself to this ind. i did this not on your behalf but on the behalf of my friend due to the fact we enjoy helping people that are in a pinch or we believe in their goals or dreams. i believe in what you are trying to do with preserving our rr history but your attitude towards helping the downtrodden in this country SUCKS that is the reason why i do not care if your adventure succeeds or fails due to your spoiled republican upbringing attitude. rr remember their are people have their ears to the ground and i am one of them. i do not mind helping out the downtrodden because i am a true socialist at heart not a capitalist pig that will trample on anyone while trying to obtain their selfish goals. i do not mind paying extra taxes for health-care and social programs as long as it fair and honest on both sides the giver and the taker. i hope you never need health assistance from the general public because i will never go to any of your fundraisers to pay your medical bills due the fact you do not have any health-care benefits at your job.
About 38% of the uninsured live in households with incomes of $50,000 or more.
According to the Census Bureau, nearly 36 million of the uninsured are legal U.S citizens. Another 9.7 million are non-citizens, but the Census Bureau does not distinguish in its estimate between legal non-citizens and illegal immigrants.
It has been estimated that almost one quarter is eligible for public coverage, and the remaining need financial assistance
According to these figures do we want to destroy our health care system and start over for less than 10% of our population?
There has to be a better way. Again Mr Obama, SLOW DOWN.
I believe in people helping themselves, but I do not believe in forcibly taking what some people have earned to give to others. All of my posts are based upon the premise that if people are give opportunities to succeed in life that they will do so. I see the government as an entity that puts people down and tries to keep them from reaching their full potential. Since you brought up my museum project let me just say that in the fourteen years of working on it I've raised over 100k, and not a penny of that has been from the government. In fact the government has stood in my way as it took over 8 months to get a building permit due to being told misinformation by city employees. I will not take government money for this project because I feel that those who want to see it succeed will contribute, but I have no right in demanding that the government strongarm people like you and take your money by force to give to my organization.
I've never been wealthy and I've never had a lot. I'm a high school graduate and have only worked blue collar jobs. In many ways I fit the description of downtrodden. However I do not think of myself as such. How can someone who lives in an economically depressed area with high unemployment and no higher education not only get by but also have the time and resources to devote to creating a museum of Youngstown's industrial heritage? Its all in one's attitude. I do not look to government to solve my problems as many others do, I find my own solutions to problems that I encounter. If many others did the same then there would not be such a drain on our governemnt to provide everything to everyone. There are still many opportunities for people in this country, but I seem them quickly eroding away and being replaced with guaranteed mediocrity by the government.
Its curious how you state that I do not believe in helping others out. That is completely untrue. I do help others out and always have. I provide help on a one on one basis, which is how it should be. There used to be a homeless man who lived over by the museum. He would come down and keep me company and I would do what I could to help him with some money and food and whatever. Last I heard he now has a job, an apartment, car and is engaged to be married. I was the only person who saw him as a friend and didn't try to take advantage of him. There have been other times when I have helped out neighbors, I've used my equipment to load machines for people at auctions, and stopped to assist stranded motorists. That is how one truly helps others in need. Not by insisting that the government take my tax money, waste most of it and then trickle the rest out to others providing so called "help".
Why do you think that I am working on this museum project? Because I am greedy and don't give a damn about others? On the contrary, I am doing this to show the people of the valley that this area was once a manufacturing powerhouse and that we had the ability to do so much when we relied upon our own brains, brawn and initiative to get things done. So many people in the valley know this place as nothing but a repository of despair, and have never known anything else. If I can save some of the things that we made here and drive home the point that the Mahoning Valley people can do whatever they want if they set their mind to it then perhaps I can contribute a tiny bit toward turning the valley around.
So you and I will continue to have our differences of opinion. I will always believe that people can do for themselves, and you will believe that people always need a handout. Thats the basic philosophical difference between liberals and conservatives.
The Health Care Sausage
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/23/opinion/23collins.html?_r=1&hpw
Transcript: Obama's Fifth News Conference
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/22/us/politics/22obama.transcript.html?ref=politics&pagewanted=all
"If we don't act, 14,000 Americans will continue to lose their health insurance every single day. These are the consequences of inaction. These are the stakes of the debate that we're having right now." Obama
Experts Dispute Some Points in Health Talk
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/23/health/policy/23facts.html?hp
Democrats Block GOP Health Care Mailing
http://www.rollcall.com/issues/55_12/news/37125-1.html?type=printer_friendly
Democrats exempt themselves from own 'reform'
If government -run health care is such a great idea, why won't members of Congress enroll their own families?
At Page 114 of the act specifically exempts members of Congress from the public plan.
You would have thought that, if having all these uninsured people is such a crisis that we have to do something "right now", some of that trillion dollar stimulus bill could have been used to purchase health insurance for people who can't afford it. I mean we gave about a hundred billion to one big insurance company anyhow. Why not spread it around to a bunch of companies to insure these people?
The truth is that is not about health care, it is about power and control. With all the money being spent, covering the uninsured would be a drop in the bucket.
Dan that is all I have seen from this congress and Administration, one big power grab. We have seen an unprecedented growth in the size of the Government and we are not getting any returns for it. I believe with 32 Czars and counting we are headed for Big brother.
It's not about health care, or global warming, or the banks failing, it's all about control.
God I hope I'm wrong.
rr, if this ind that i dropped off the begging letter comes through with monies with your project. i wonder what you would do? take or refuse? you sank over 100 k i wonder how many dollar bills came from rich people or working class people that believed in your project? the biggest contributors to social causes comes from the middle working class not the top ten percent rich people in this country. i wonder why the middle class believes in social causes faster then the the top ten percent rich class does in donating to charity? you pick and choose who you help, i do not pick and choose. you weigh out the cause and effect of your donation before you give. i say i much do you need for your cause? and how can i help you cause? like i said before i wish you luck in your project but i will not give you a single dime to your cause due to your republican selfish ways.
JUST IN:
The Senate will not vote on health care legislation before
leaving for its summer recess on Aug. 8, Senator Harry Reid
of Nevada, the majority leader, said on Thursday, finally
acknowledging publicly the inescapable political reality that
has been clear for several days.
Details:
No health care vote before August break, top Democrat says
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/07/23/health.care/index.html
THE CHART PELOSI DOESN'T WANT YOU TO SEE!
http://docs.house.gov/gopleader/House-Democrats-Health-Plan.pdf
iwasthere, I wish I could understand fully what you were trying to say to me in your last post, but unfortunately I cannot. You underestimate the philanthropy of what you call the "top ten percent" in this valley. That segment of the population has made many things happen that otherwise would not have.
I do not believe in class warfare and do not pay any attention to the social status of a contributor. I am sorry that you must look at life as a rich vs. poor. I am also sorry that you cannot grasp the concepts of self determination, rugged individualism and optimism that are halmarks of true conservative philosophy. Its still not too late to come over into the light and leave the darkness of self made despair, class warfare and racism behind. A conservative believes that everyone has an equal opportunity to make the best they can out of life, that freed of the shackles of government oppression the sky is the limit on what can be accomplished. When you are ready I will help you to help yourself.
Conservatiives creates Class warfare and racism. Every conservative on this forum believes Archie Bunker is a saint. Conservatives are wanting to take us back to the Gilded Age...the richer get richer, the poor get poorer......
Watch the movie Titantic....the Conservatives got on the lifeboats, the poor got locked downstairs and went down with the ship.......
First class, second class, third class, etc.....that's what conservatives want to take America back too......
I don't know where you get your notions about conservatives, but they certainly don't come from any conservative philosophy.
I do not believe Archie Bunker is a saint. I have never watched that show. So you're wrong on your first point.
Conservatives do not want the poor to get poorer. We wish that everyone would elevate their positions in life. But we believe that it is UP TO THE INDIVIDUAL to do that themselves. They have the ability but do they have the will?
On the Titanic, it was the women and children who were saved, the rich "conservative" men such as John Jacob Astor and George D. Wick, founder of YS&T died. Is all of your history this faulty? Wrong on your second point.
Conservatives do not judge people based upon their race or social status, we judge them by their abilities. It is the liberals such as yourself who continue to bring up race and class, such as you are doing now. You are trying to perpetuate this so called "class warfare" in this very post. If your liberal teachings abhorr that then why do you continue to perpetuate it?
Its time for you to take the first step toward true equality. In the future do not discuss a person's class status or race, and treat everyone as equals. The wealthiest American citizen should have the same rights, priveleges and responsibilities as the poorest person.
yada yada yada, ....same old conservative lies and distortions, and inequalities proudly on display and parades as All-American values......yuck....
RR, your conservative pals from the past ideals caused the little steel strike the massacre on innocent women and children and working men that wanted a fair wage for their daily work. your conservatives views made it legal for the ford's and the Vanderbilt's' ect...... to use the state military to quell strikes at their corporations that left on their hands blood. if fdr did not legalize unions, this country would truly have a red scare in this country. maybe the reasons are that you cannot read/understand my posts is because you lack a liberal college education. your post suggests that ind(s) are what they are due to their lot in life and they belong in their social status because of their choices. yes and no. i do believe in helping people that are not arrogant such as the conservatives on this forum. you complained on other post that i attack your person. RR, you have attacked me and others on this forum in other posts of other natures. i never complained but you did. if you cannot take criticism do not dish it out.
Why does Dennis still refuse to accept facts that are part of history?
Dennis you were found to be wrong, just admit it and move on. And I told you to stop using Hollywood as a source.
I would love to see every American above poverty level, Not because I worked for it, but because they did. It's that simple, you reap what you sow.
Once again I remind you that 2000 years ago we were told the poor will always be with us.
Nice to change it, but doubtful it can be done.
Sargent First Class Flea Collar.....
YOU DON"T TELL ME WHAT TO DO>>>>>>>>>>
YOU CONSERVATIVE DITTO HEAD......
If a liberal education means not using punctuation, capitalization or proper sentence structure then I am glad that all I have is a 12 year public education from the Hubbard school system.
For a personal attack to be a personal attack, the identiy of the victim must be known. All we know you by is your alias, so by definition there can be no personal attack. I on the other hand am not afraid of my views and place my name at the top of every post I make. Are you prepared to come out with your full name and stand behind what you say?
Have to agree with Rick and because of that have to give Dennis some credit. As ridicules as his attacks are he does attach his name to them.
BTW Dennis, I tell you not to use Hollywood so you might at least sound more intelligent. And I am not a Ditto Head, What I hear from Rush is what the Democrats on the boards tell me. I wonder why they all listen to him?
Proud Conservative Right wing Radical.
"Health insurance is like a hospital gown, you think you are covered but you are not." Carl Romanelli (2006 Green Party candidate for U.S. Senate from PA).
Last night at his prime time health care news conference, President Obama finally admitted what we have known all along.
"I want to cover everybody. Now, the truth is that unless you have a -- what's called a single-payer system, in which everybody's automatically covered, then you're probably not going to reach every single individual."
There it is folks. Only single payer can fix the ills with our health care system. He also talked about the critical importance of "eliminating waste". Only single payer effectively does that, by cutting out the massive overhead waste (31%) by paper churning insurance industry bureaucrats, who line their own pockets to provide LESS health care with the available resources.
Single Payer Action Page: http://www.peaceteam.net/action/pnum998.php
This is the single payer moment. We have enough Democrats alone to pass it. So why hasn't it been signed into law yet?
Why not a single payer system? Because the big insurance and drug companies don't want that? Oh, really?? What about what we the people want? What about what would be best for America? We need to tell our members of Congress what we want, keep telling them, and remind them that we told them.
So please submit the action page above. And when do you will have an opportunity from the return page to get one of the NEW "Single Payer Health Care" caps, touting the concept with the PEOPLE's talking points, that it is the "economical and efficient" way to go.
It is time for us to seize control of the media marketing of political policy. And with this new cap you can spread the meme that single payer is not a "risky experiment" or "socialized medicine" or "rationing care" or any of the other cheap shot smears that the right wing has tried to pass off lately as a policy debate. No, the words that need to come out of our mouth are "economical and efficient" and then all will know what single payer is REALLY about.
You can request the new single payer cap, or another activist gift, directly from this page
Progressive Activist Gift Page: http://www.peaceteam.net/all_gifts.php
And yes, you can also respond to this action through the new Twitter gateway Just send the following Twitter reply, and add any personal comment you like.
@cxs #p998
And if you want a step by step explanation of how to set up the Twitter thing here is the link for that.
Twitter Activism Step-By-Step: http://tcxs.net/step_by_step.php
Please take action NOW, so we can win all victories that are supposed to be ours, and forward this alert as widely as possible.
If you would like to get alerts like these, you can do so at http://www.peaceteam.net/in.htm
I doubt I will ever believe much of what Mr Stupidly has to say about anything.
Single-payer system = Every Single person in the whole wide world = FREE HEALTH CARE TO ALL ... NO EXCEPTIONS ... NO EXCLUSIONS EXCEPT THOSE OVER 65. SENIOR CITIZENS NOT INCLUDED.
Yep we'll still pay our Medicare shares. With existing penalties.
sarge, who are you calling stupid?
Why I was simply quoting from our fearsome leader in Washington.
i think a beer or two will help our fearsome leader out of his stupidity. i think we should take score who will say the most stupid things during their presidency Bush Jr. or Obama.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkGGDOp4uUg
Iwasthere, I'd bet the odds in Vegas are even up.
Why the mandate plans won't work, and why
single-payer "Medicare for All" is what we need
By Len Rodberg, PhD
1. Americans are afraid that they can't afford to get sick. Those of us with insurance are paying
more and more of the premium and more out-of-pocket as well. Studies show further that we face
bankruptcy if we get sick.1 Many among us have to choose between paying for medicine and paying
for food and housing. And with the recent economic downturn, the ranks of those without insurance
are growing.
2. A majority of physicians (59 percent) and an even higher proportion of Americans (62
percent or more) support single-payer national health insurance or "Medicare for All."2 In
spite of this, all we are hearing about today are mandate plans that would require everyone to
buy the same private insurance that is already failing us. These proposals don't regulate
insurance premiums, they don't keep the insurance companies from refusing to pay many of our
bills, and they don't improve the insurance we now have. Some offer a "public option," but this will
quickly become too expensive as the sick flee to the public sector as private insurers avoid them,
abandon them, or make it too difficult for them to get their bills paid.
3. These proposals won't work, either to expand coverage or to contain costs. Plans like these
have been tried in many states over the past two decades (Massachusetts, Tennessee, Washington
State, Oregon, Minnesota, Vermont, Maine).3 They have all failed to reduce the number of uninsured
or to contain costs.
4. These mandate plans will add hundreds of billions of dollars to the nation's health care
costs. In this economic downturn, we need assure health care for all without adding to the nation's
cost and the government's deficit. The bottom line is: these proposals don't reform our
fragmented, inefficient system, they just add to its complexity and costs.
5. As long as we continue to rely on private for-profit insurers, universal coverage will be
unaffordable. Their administrative costs consume nearly one-third of our health care dollar.4 We
will never have enough money to provide everyone with decent care until we eliminate private
insurance with its enormous waste and inadequate coverage. And we will never be able to keep costs
down and get the care we need as long as the wasteful and unnecessary insurance companies stand
between us and our doctors.
6. Every other industrialized country has some form of universal health care. None uses
profitmaking, investor-owned insurance companies like ours to provide health care for all their
people.5
7. We have an American system that works. It's Medicare. It's not perfect, but Americans with
Medicare are far happier than those with private insurance. Doctors face fewer hassles in getting
paid, and Medicare has been a leader in keeping costs down. And keep in mind that Medicare insures people with the greatest health care needs: people over 65 and the disabled. We should
improve and expand Medicare to cover everyone.
8. A single-payer "Medicare for All" system is embodied in H.R. 676, sponsored by Rep. John
Conyers and 92 other members of Congress. It would have:
• Automatic enrollment for everyone
• Comprehensive services covering all medically necessary care and drugs
• Free choice of doctor and hospital, who remain independent and negotiate their fees and
budgets with a public or nonprofit agency
• Public or nonprofit agency processes and pays the bills
• Entire system financed through progressive taxes
• Help job growth and the entire U.S. economy by removing the burden of health costs from
business
• Cover everyone without spending any more than we are now.6
8. The growth in health care costs must be addressed if any proposal is to succeed.
• Single payer offers real tools to contain costs: budgeting, especially for hospitals, planning
of capital investments, and an emphasis on primary care and coordination of care.
• Mandate plans offer only hopes: competition among insurance companies,
computerization, chronic disease management. Competition among the shrinking number
of insurance companies has already failed to contain costs and, in the absence of single
payer and reformed primary care, computerization and chronic disease management will
raise costs, not lower them.
9. Single-payer Medicare for All is the right answer:
• It is right on choice. In mandate plans we get a choice of plan, but we lose our choice of
doctor and hospital. Single payer ensures choice of doctor and hospital.
• It is right on efficiency. Single payer would slash administrative costs and promote
efficient primary care. It would also enhance evidence-based quality assurance.
• It is right on accountability. It will be a public, nonprofit system that will respond to what
doctors and their patients need, not what corporate executives and their stockholders
as long as we have politicians the odds are always going to be up in Vegas and in the back rooms of well est. beer saloons.