What is preventing the U.S. from getting Universal Healthcare?

[ColbertWatcher]

[closeupready]

1. Other - a Congress that doesn't - by and large - put Americans first.

n/t

[Edweird]

58. You said it. That covers a LOT of what's hurting all of us right now....

[unpossibles]

2. I see it as a combination of things

mainly the amount of money made by insurance and pharmaceutical companies, but also fall out from our protracted fight against anything remotely resembling socialism despite the fact that many programs which we successfully have and use are also somewhat socialist in nature.

That is one of the larger obstacles - opponents have just thrown out the Red Scare thing, and it shuts down the conversation too often.

[ColbertWatcher]

5. I think I should add that as an option before the editing period is over. n/t

[One_Life_To_Give]

3. The Devil you know.

For all the people who are currently insured. The prospect that anything new might be worse than what they already have.

[Clark2008]

4. Other: Republicans, DINOs and other people not concerned

with the average, middle-class American.

[margotb822]

39. Concur

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

Politicians who know who pays their way.

[Beaverhausen]

6. Politicians who are in the pockets of big phrama and the insurance companies

and sadly, that's almost all of them.

[Buzz Clik]

7. Keep insurance in the loop, and healthcare will NEVER be universal.

[ColbertWatcher]

10. Just for argument's sake, would you mind...

...giving a little detail about your opinion?

Maybe an example?

[Buzz Clik]

27. Insurance is a way of socializing medicine, which is fine because it makes things affordable.

The devastation of catastrophic illnesses, accidents, etc is avoided by having large groups pay into a central insurance plan. That was all good when the insurance companies were willing to stay relatively small and humble. Now, however, they are taking a bigger and bigger percentage of the money that goes into the pool and they've become stingier in what they allow and the coverage they offer. (Example -- my plan was cheaper ten years ago and had both dental and total coverage for routine eye exams and lenses every other year. Now, I have no dental and the cap on eye coverage means that the insurances pays a maximum of $100 per year.)

As long as insurance companies are present and demand their cut of the action, we'll never have universal insurance. The poor cannot afford the premiums (and there isn't enough left to bring them in at less cost) and the rich can afford to tell the insurers to piss off.

No, the health insurance companies must disappear before we have universal health care.

[ColbertWatcher]

29. Thank you. n/t

[Fumesucker]

51. Another take on the same point..

Excluding those most likely to need insurance is a game that the insurance companies have developed into an art form, that is how they maximize profits.

If you the chance of you using benefits is quite small, you will have little problem getting a policy, assuming you can afford it. The more likely you are to make use of the benefits, the less likely you are to get a policy at any price whatsoever.

[ColbertWatcher]

55. Nicely put. n/t

[DailyGrind51]

28. Health insurance honchos are making money from our misery!

"BTW: 10% of 14.9 billion is 1.4 billion. If basic insurance costs $8,000/year for a family then taking 10% from just these CEO salaries would insure 35,000 Americans a year for five years. That is a lot of people that can be helped just by 23 men. Looking at the companies as a whole that profit from health care, we can probably pay for every uninsured person in this country for decades to come.

The numbers are numbing, which is why we should do something about this.

* United Health Group
CEO: William W McGuire
2005: 124.8 mil
5-year: 342 mil

* Forest Labs
CEO: Howard Solomon
2005: 92.1 mil
5-year: 295 mil

* Caremark Rx
CEO: Edwin M Crawford
2005: 77.9 mil
5-year: 93.6 mil

* Abbott Lab
CEO: Miles White
2005: 26.2 mil
5-year: 25.8 mil

* Aetna
CEO: John Rowe
2005: 22.1 mil
5-year:57.8 mil

* Amgen
CEO: Kevin Sharer
2005:5.7 mil
5-year:59.5 mil

* Bectin-Dickinson
CEO: Edwin Ludwig
2005: 10 mil
5-year:18 mil

* Boston Scientific
CEO:
2005:38.1 mil
5-year:45 mil

* Cardinal Health
CEO: James Tobin
2005:1.1 mil
5-year:33.5 mil

* Cigna
CEO: H. Edward Hanway
2005:13.3 mil
5-year:62.8 mil

* Genzyme
CEO: Henri Termeer
2005: 19 mil
5-year:60.7 mil

* Humana
CEO: Michael McAllister
2005:2.3 mil
5-year:12.9 mil

* Johnson & Johnson
CEO: William Weldon
2005:6.1 mil
5-year:19.7 mil

* Laboratory Corp America
CEO: Thomas MacMahon
2005:7.9 mil
5-year:41.8 mil

* Eli Lilly
CEO: Sidney Taurel
2005:7.2 mil
5-year:37.9 mil

* McKesson
CEO: John Hammergen
2005: 13.4 mil
5-year:31.2 mil

* Medtronic
CEO: Arthur Collins
2005: 4.7 mil
5-year:39 mil

* Merck Raymond Gilmartin
CEO:
2005: 37.8 mil
5-year:49.6 mil

* PacifiCare Health
CEO: Howard Phanstiel
2005: 3.4 mil
5-year: 8.5 mil

* Pfizer
CEO: Henry McKinnell
2005: 14 mil
5-year: 74 mil

* Well Choice
CEO: Michael Stocker
2005: 3.2 mil
5-year: 10.7 mil

* WellPoint
CEO: Larry Glasscock
2005: 23 mil
5-year: 46.8 mil

* Wyeth
CEO: Robert Essner
2005:6.5 mil
5-year: 28.9 mil


TOTAL 2005: 559.8 mil

TOTAL 5-Year: 14.9 billion"

http://blogs.webmd.com/mad-about-medicine/2007/08/ceo-compensation-who-said-healthcare-is.html

[Warpy]

8. FEAR

Even people being screwed by the system fear change. Congressmen and Presidents fear being called Socialists. Doctors fear a decrease in income. Drug companies fear restrictions and having to bid for regional contracts. Insurance companies fear being left out in the cold (cry me a river). The wealthy who run this country fear losing a few dollars and having to associate with their countrymen if they get sick.

When the terror of being destroyed by the involuntary process of getting sick or injured outweighs all the fear of change, then we'll get universal, single payer insurance.

I'm afraid that's a long time away.

[eShirl]

9. Mammon needs more human sacrifices.

n/t

[ColbertWatcher]

12. More sacrifices, eh?

[eShirl]

16. lol

mickey needs salt

[ColbertWatcher]

20. Just an FYI...

...that is a painting by Enrique Chagoya called "The Governors Nightmare".

The painting depicts savages offering up Mickey Mouse as sacrifice, done in the style of an ancient Aztec codex.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/17/entertainment/et-chagoya17">Here is an article about the artist and his work from the LA Times.

[Clovis Sangrail]

11. the health care industry as a whole

there are a lot of companies who profit by gaming our broken health care system.
Manufacturers of everything from cotton swabs to insulin bags as well as the retailers that sell the stuff are profiting off of the current system and don't want to see it changed.

I say... fuck 'em all.
:evilgrin:

[flvegan]

13. Greed.

[bunkerbuster1]

14. Went with #2, but I've got a nitpicky point...

It's not that the insurance companies are making "too much money." It's that they are an established service business that employ a lot of people and control a great deal of treasure.

Even if these businesses were the most responsible, enlightened ones around, it'd still be painful to nationalize them. Someone's going to come out on the losing end. I don't expect them to take this threat lying down, and I think the fight for nationalized health care will be a very tough one.

[ColbertWatcher]

17. "...they are an established service business...

"...that employ a lot of people and control a great deal of treasure."

BUt, don't they also deny people's legitimate claims?

Isn't that like "making too much money"?

[bunkerbuster1]

30. Hey, maybe they DO "make too much money"

I'm just saying their profitability or lack thereof isn't necessarily the reason it'll be difficult to get to nationalized health care.

[ColbertWatcher]

32. OK, just trying to understand. n/t

[Greyhound]

25. Good thing we have those broadly expanded eminent domain powers, eh? n/t

[bunkerbuster1]

31. Never thought of it that way, but yeah!

[harun]

46. Let the government buy them out with my tax dollars, wouldn't bother

me a bit.

[eridani]

49. An approach that can work with lower level employees

The one thing that insurance companies do that actually adds value is to process claims, which accounts for a significant percentage of the warm bodies. If the government is the insurer, it can absolutely promise that those jobs will never, ever be outsourced. Governments can get voted out, as opposed to insurance company execs.

[bunkerbuster1]

59. Sure, but with a single payer plan, a lot of those jobs will go away.

Not all of them, of course. There will still be plenty of work processing claims, and presumably the best and brightest (from high-level administrators to entry-level clerks) should be recruited from the industry.

[eridani]

65. Coincidentally, there is a big nursing shortage ahead

Retraining is a good option. Taking care of sick people is useful work. Sitting in front of a computer and telling sick people "that's not covered" is not.

[izquierdista]

15. It's not that difficult

Despite the combinatorial infinity of policies and coverage offered under the current health insurance system, there are really only 3 ways of paying for health care: (a) doctors and medical services on the public payroll, (b) doctors and medical services in private businesses, but largely paid through publicly funded insurance, and (c -- the worst) everything set up as little capitalist businesses, from the doctors, nurses, hospitals, home health care, pharmacies, and so on through to the insurance to pay for it all. Option A exists for veterans and is called the VA; option B exists for those over 65 and is called Medicare. Option C is known by the deluded as "the best medical care in the world"; a boast that belies the 37th tier standing the US has in WHO comparisons.

The best thing for the US to do is to keep increasing the number of people eligible under options A & B, until option C withers and dies.

[ColbertWatcher]

18. Nicely put. I would like to nominate you for Secretary of Health and Human Services. n/t

[yellowdogintexas]

21. been saying this for years, ever since I was employed by a Part B Medicare carrier

as a claims processor. There would still be plenty of jobs in the insurance industry if that pool were expanded, somebody has to get the claims through the system. If the coverage were the same for everyone (as it is in Medicare) administrative costs would plummet, and the expense incurred by providers would go down because they wouldn't have to have a cast of thousands to keep up with which insurance covers what and under what circumstances.

[papapi]

19. Sick people. . .

and insurance companies, pharmas, private hospitals and doctors who are too greedy to give up on their dime. Also a certain amount of left over fear about socialized medicine being the first step towards communism and the ruination of our health care system fostered in the 70s, 80s, and 90s by (see above).

[sui generis]

22. the most basic violation of our constitution

At its core, our nation defends the rights of the individual. Somehow we have a new gestalt growing in our legislative value system that says it's okay to promote the rights of a social group or an economic interest over the rights of individuals, without limit.

So you can't sue your doctor or your HMO, you are stuck with "binding arbitration" agreements and limits on statutory recompense for damages and your insurance company and pharma company has a greater right to earn a profit than you do to stay alive.

This is a plutocracy, where the rights of a corporation clearly outweigh the rights of an individual, where cities routinely exercise eminent domain in pursuit of presumptive corporate claim and where the supreme court openly states that no individual has guarantee of any right not explicitly defined by law.

It's a sick country folks, and the public healthcare needs to start with curing this creeping legislative disease. We need to nationalize airlines (who can't stay profitable and in business without huge layoffs and handouts), fossil fuel refining capacity, bullet and gunpowder production, and use existing insurance companies as record keeping bodies only. THEY do not have a "right" to exist that supercedes the rights of living, breathing entities.

[LWolf]

23. Citizens and the politicians they elect.

It's there. In Congress, right now. It's been there. It has 90 cosponsors. Party leaders don't want it, voters aren't holding the party or congress accountable for it.

The hallowed democratic nominee does not support universal health CARE.

It was a big topic during the primaries, with all but one candidate doing more talking than walking on universal health care. I don't expect to hear much about it now that the primaries are over.

[indepat]

24. Other: the essence of 'puke values

:D

[undeterred]

26. There are too many people making a huge profit off human misery.

Not only the insurance companies but the pharmaceutical industry and a few people in the delivery system too.

[KT2000]

33. Soul sickness

It is considered a value by many in this country that caring about others demonstrates a weakness of individuality. All the moneyed interests have to do is supply reasons why the uninsured are really failures as human beings, not really people in need, and the population seems willing to go along with it.
If caring about others even remotely costs everyone a dime - there will always be reasons not to support those issues. The pain and suffering of others seems to have no effect on those decisions either.
Katrina
Iraq civilians
Torture
Poverty
Catastrophic Illness

[Super Soaker Sniper]

34. The threat of a full blown revolt

by those that would have to pay for it.

I have great healthcare and at a very good price. My company values my work enugh that they provide it. I have no doubt that any governt mandated healathcare would not match what I have as far as price and quality. My support for a government run healthcare program is conditional on being able to opt out.

For those of you that would really like a universal program, I would like one also, but here is a question. What government department or program can you name right now that is being run in a manner that you would like to have your healthcare run that way?

That is what scares me about something this massive being placed under government control. That the people in charge of FEMA, TSA, Immigration, FAA, Social Security would be running it. They show me nothing that would make me think that they would run healthcare any better.

[ColbertWatcher]

35. Fire department. Post office. n/t

[Greyhound]

43. That's exactly what they want you to fear.

We are already paying more than any other nation on earth, in both per capita and total cost, and we get far less than they.

The exorbitant prices are the result of the insurance industry profits, take out the profit motive and we can give it to everybody and spend less too.

[old mark]

36. The American Medical Association has been against

universal health care in the US since the mid 19th century.
They are among the first th label it "socialism".
Their motive, as far as I understand it, has been pure greed - doctors in universal healthcare systems don't get rich.

AMA believes that doctors MUST get rich.


mark

[eShirl]

37. My uncle's blood glucose monitor that would have cost Medicare $135.00

cost me $9.95 plus shipping, out-of-pocket retail from Amazon.

[SoCalDem]

38. Money-now..Reluctance to accept a national ID system-longterm

To provide a real national healthcare system, we HAVE to be able to identify just who is eligible and who is not.. There are enough people around who think they are invisible, and will fight an ID system, so pols know it's safe to pretend to want healthcare, while knowing they will never really have to deliver..

The minute we HAVE scannable, nearly-foolproof, biometric IDs, there will be no real impediment to getting national universal healthcare..

[Overseas]

40. There is a LOT OF PROFIT in promoting Disease Care. Mega-corporations with super lobbyists

have dominated our political scene. Otherwise, why wouldn't US manufacturers have pushed for national health insurance to even the playing field with competitors whose governments pay those bills for their workers?

Billions and billions in profits for keeping us sick and scared.

[damntexdem]

41. The Health Insurance ASsociation of America led the charge against reform in 1992-94.

Harry and Louise was sophisticated for then -- but would be nothing compared to what the industry would bring against reform today. All we would have would be votes -- for a big-enough Congressional majority.

[pleah]

42. 1,2 & 6.

A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.
- Edward R. Murrow

[DailyGrind51]

44. Edward R. Murrow would be saying, "I tried to warn you!", if he were

still alive today.

[begin_within]

45. Just plain old greed.

The people who benefit the most from the current system are the ones who oppose any change, obviously.

[ColbertWatcher]

48. Nicely put. n/t

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

47. HMO's are the true enemies here, with big pharma riding shotgun

[L0oniX]

50. Sorry ...we're too busy spending all our money on war to give a shit about our own.

HEALTH CARE IS A HUMAN RIGHT ...DAMN IT ALL. Blood thirsty m*thaf*ckas profit from death.

[The Gunslinger]

52. I'd say the first second and last choice

[Hotler]

53. One word. Greed! eom..

[LanternWaste]

54. I think it's a combination of...

I think it's a combination of vested interests, conventional wisdom and faith in the "free" market, the human Resistance to change-- even in the face of danger, and very good propaganda by the GOP... well, those and the billion other reasons I cannot immediatley think of.. :shrug:

I imagine your question has as many different and valid answers as the actual solution.

[ColbertWatcher]

56. True...

...but if you look at the one choice not voted on, the one choice that implies that it's too hard to accomplish...the one choice that allows for us to not even try to solve the problem of 40 million Americans without health care because it's "too complicated"...no one voted for it.

No one who participated thinks it's too hard to even try.

121 votes, 88 for insurance being too greedy, 2 for the pharmcos being too greedy, 3 think America doesn't need it, 13 for "people are scared of socialism" and 15 "other" votes. But not one person believes it's too complicated to switch.

Of course, I expect someone to vote for it now that I said no one voted for it, but no one has yet.

[ShadowLiberal]

57. Too expensive, the cost scares away politicians, and we have a $400 billion deficit already

The main thing stopping it is the cost, and the fact that we've got a $400 billion dollar deficit already.

Or as one of my teachers once said, there's always enough money to fight a war, but never enough money to pay for health care. Health cares cost would sort of be like declaring a permanent war, costing hundreds of billions of dollars a year.

[Echo In Light]

60. Profits over of people = The American Way

[Freddie Stubbs]

61. Because there is already a system in which most people have health insurance

The people who have health insurance do not want to give up what they have.

[Romulox]

63. In other words, Americans are horribly selfish. nt

[raccoon]

62. You need to offer a vote of #1 and #2. nt

[DailyGrind51]

64. Health insurers get away with discriminating against the sick!

If they denied coverage on the basis of race, gender, ethnicity, creed, or preference, they would be held in violation of their civil rights. However, if an applicant has a history of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc. discrimination is O.K.?