Skip Navigation Change.gov: The Obama-Biden Transition Team
 

Citizen's Briefing Book Component

LOGIN



FIND AN ISSUE YOU CARE ABOUT



MORE CATEGORIES

Content Starts Here

Idea Detail

1510
Points

Single payer health care

.

Only a single payer plan, phased in by expanding Medicare and ultimately excluding insurance companies is affordable and acceptable.
7 Comments  »  Posted by Mrs. Winter to Health Care on 1/12/2009 10:47 AM

Comments

 
Jenadots
1/12/2009 10:56 AM
Absolutely not.  

We do not need a single payer plan of any sort.  I want competition amongst the insurance companies.

Everyone talks about medical reform when what we really need is insurance reforms and a government pool of insurance plans that people can buy into on some sort of a sliding income scale. 

Most people want choices and not many people want to ever have to be put on any sort of waiting list for life-saving surgery or treatments which unfortunately seems to be a side effect of single payer systems. 

If you want an example of this, just take a good look at the waiting lists that veterans have to deal with.  It is shameful.  

Reformed private insurance plans where no one can be denied treatments and subsidized plans for those who cannot afford any insurance is a far better way to go. 

 
Miryam
1/12/2009 12:14 PM
With all due respect to the previous poster, a universal, single-payer health care plan is exactly what we need. Health care is not the place to reward those sophisticated enough to be able to navigate among competing coverages. It is not the place to punish those with too little education to be able to read policies and understand the distinctions. 

Single-payer does not have to put insurance companies out of business. People who are happy with what they have should be able to keep it, but the rest of us should be able to have coverage that is as good as that afforded to our legislators.

As one with considerable knowledge of the health care systems in the rest of the industrialized world, I can say with assurance that other governments do not make people wait on line for life-saving surgery or treatments. True, people who want elective surgery get on a list, but those with real needs are served, and promptly. I know this to be true in Canada, Sweden, the UK, Denmark, France, and Germany.  Why not us?

The Obama administration must find a way to debunk the insurance industry's characterization of single payer health care as "socialized medicine" as though that were a bad thing.  At the health care discussion group in which I participated, several people introduced themselves by saying they were opposed to "socialized medicine," and then went on to describe their ideal system -- a universal, single payer plan.

One of our most urgent needs is universal coverage, independent of a person's employment status. This is becoming more important every day, as jobs continue to disappear.
 
bobcb
1/12/2009 12:42 PM
We do not need to perpetuate a "jobs program" for health insurers when they are the ones principally responsible for exponential health care cost increases,  Over 1300 separate insurers and 17,000 plans drive doctors and hospitals nuts dealing with the paperwork and drive their (and our) costs out of sight!  Those in the private sector who process claims will likely have jobs in a single payer system---- the highly overcompensated top executives can find out what they are really worth in a tough job market.  Perhaps they should practice saying: "would you like fries with that"?
 
bobcb
1/12/2009 12:46 PM
I don't like the "phased in" part of this question----- insurers and trial lawyers will never let that happen.  We need to convert now while there is overwhelming public (and physician) support for doing so.  Is this a "seeded question"?
 
John Rose
1/13/2009 9:31 AM
Single-payer health care isn't about eliminating choice.  It's about establishing a minimum level of care that we as Americans find to be acceptable for the least fortunate among us.  It's clear from our mandatory treatment laws in emergency rooms that we're unwilling to accept that these people should die of easily treatable diseases, but we shouldn't wait until the health problems of the destitute become emergencies to provide treatment.

The rich will still buy better treatment, and insurance companies will still profit, but the poor must be given some security from having to make bankruptcy-inducing, life-or-death decisions when they are absolutely vulnerable.
 
velvettami
1/13/2009 12:35 PM
Currently here in michigan if your a single mother with children and you have no money you can apply and get on medicaid, But you must have children or your out and  its very hard to find a doctor or dentist that is close to home, especially when it comes to dentist it's nearly impossible to find a dentist. They need to figure out a way in getting all doctors and dentists to except the government health care.   
 
The Progressive Logic Guy
1/13/2009 12:58 PM

IS CHANGE.GOV A DECEPTION?

Why has Obama been ignoring the demand of his supporters for a single payer health care system?  Does he have political debts to the insurance companies, HMOs, and pharmaceutical corporations? Government officials don’t worry about “affordable” health care, they get it for free.  We should take health insurance off the backs of employers and have a generalized Medicare system for all citizens and resident aliens.  Are we who participate in this exercise being had?

Subscribe to ideas