Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Medicare for all.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
BattyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 11:16 PM
Original message
Medicare for all.
That's it. That will end this madness. The screamers won't be able to disrupt a damn thing with their lies and misinformation because EVERYONE knows what Medicare is and how it works. Anyone who knows a senior on Medicare is well aware of the fact that no one from the government is denying them treatment, interfering with their doctors or killing them because their too old. Add a REAL prescription plan, some dental, mental and vision coverage, and people will get behind it.

The Dems played this all wrong. They should have started with single payer and settled on the public option as a compromise, if necessary. Instead, they put so much information out there, so many convoluted plans and possibilities, that it became painfully easy to distort the truth and frighten people. When Obama had his healthcare press conference, he had no real information to give the public because there was no final bill. It was all hypothetical. How could the public embrace a plan when they didn't even know what that plan was? Even now, the Dems can't fight back because they have nothing to fight back with. THERE'S NO BILL YET! How can they possibly convince people that everything will be fine when they don't even know what it is they're supporting? Yes, they support reform, but what does that mean?

What a mess! :-(

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
csziggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 11:19 PM
Response to Original message
1. I've wondered - why have separate systems?
Medicare is already up and running, just make it bigger. Start out by allowing people who have it keep their current insurance, but let everyone else into Medicare system. Wonder how long private health insurance would last after that?!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BattyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 11:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. It makes the most sense ... and they know it.
That's why I can't help but wonder if the whole "healthcare reform" thing is just political theater. :-(

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
csziggy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #3
8. Of course, the Congress critters are pretending to 'attempt' to do what we want
While really protecting the interests of their corporate sponsors in the insurance and pharmaceutical industries.

I wonder if that is why the Obama White House is asking Democratic activists to stay out of the fray with the town hall insanity. If the insurance company shills piss off the Congress critters, maybe they will actually start thinking about the voters rather than the corporations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
2. The Progressive Caucus in the House wanted the pay for doctors...
...to be Medicare +5% in the public option.

But the Blue Dogs in the House stopped that because they want doctors paid more with tax dollars.

But AP reporters still call the Blue Dogs "fiscally conservative."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BattyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I know the Blue Dogs aren't helping the situation.
Edited on Thu Aug-06-09 11:36 PM by BattyDem
I guess what I really want is for President Obama to take a stand. He showed such strong leadership during the campaign. He inspired people to get involved and convinced them that anything was possible if they were willing to work hard for it. Where's that leadership now? It seems like he's sitting on the sidelines, instead of leading the way. Yes, I know he's busy because he was left with quite a few messes to clean up, but he started this. He said he wants healthcare reform this year ... well, DO SOMETHING about it!

Dems have the White House. Dems have strong majorities in Congress. The election was a clear mandate for Democratic ideas. So why do I still feel like I'm supporting the minority party? :shrug:


edited: typo :blush:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Arkana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. Because the real minority party is so fucking loud it drowns out all
rational thought.

The one guy with a boom box blasting Slayer at a Gordon Lightfoot concert will be heard, no matter how many Gordon Lightfoot fans are there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dflprincess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. I'd rather pay the doctors than the health insurance companies
at least the docs are providing a necessary service.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cynatnite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 11:40 PM
Response to Original message
6. I'd pay higher taxes for that. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BattyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. It would be worth it.
Imagine never having to worry about losing your health insurance or going bankrupt because of medical bills.

Imagine never having to make another call to the insurance company for pre-approval or authorization of treatment.

Imagine walking into a doctor's office or a hospital and having the first question be, "What's the problem?" instead of "Do you have insurance?".

Imagine not having to worry that if you lose your current health insurance, you'll be uninsurable because of a pre-existing condition.

Imagine being diagnosed with a serious medical problem and having your first thought be, "I'm going to fight this" instead of "I hope I don't have to fight the insurance company".

Imagine waking up in the hospital after a serious accident without worrying if that hospital is in your network.

Imagine being able to go to an emergency room when you think there's something seriously wrong and not have to worry if the insurance company will decide it wasn't a "real" emergency and refuse to pay for it.



Yeah, it would definitely be worth it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lugnut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-06-09 11:46 PM
Response to Original message
7. K&R
It could be so easy. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bkkyosemite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 12:17 AM
Response to Original message
9. Some analyst was telling Olbermann that the people are not ready for Single Payer. Want to bet jerk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
many a good man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 12:51 AM
Response to Original message
11. How about VHA health care for all?
Dems should have started out advocating VHA (Veterans Health Administration, part of VA) for all and compromised down to single payer!


Yet here's a curious fact that few conservatives or liberals know. Who do you think receives higher-quality health care. Medicare patients who are free to pick their own doctors and specialists? Or aging veterans stuck in those presumably filthy VA hospitals with their antiquated equipment, uncaring administrators, and incompetent staff? An answer came in 2003, when the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine published a study that compared veterans health facilities on 11 measures of quality with fee-for-service Medicare. On all 11 measures, the quality of care in veterans facilities proved to be "significantly better."

Here's another curious fact. The Annals of Internal Medicine recently published a study that compared veterans health facilities with commercial managed-care systems in their treatment of diabetes patients. In seven out of seven measures of quality, the VA provided better care.

It gets stranger. Pushed by large employers who are eager to know what they are buying when they purchase health care for their employees, an outfit called the National Committee for Quality Assurance today ranks health-care plans on 17 different performance measures. These include how well the plans manage high blood pressure or how precisely they adhere to standard protocols of evidence-based medicine such as prescribing beta blockers for patients recovering from a heart attack. Winning NCQA's seal of approval is the gold standard in the health-care industry. And who do you suppose this year's winner is: Johns Hopkins? Mayo Clinic? Massachusetts General? Nope. In every single category, the VHA system outperforms the highest rated non-VHA hospitals.

Not convinced? Consider what vets themselves think. Sure, it's not hard to find vets who complain about difficulties in establishing eligibility. Many are outraged that the Bush administration has decided to deny previously promised health-care benefits to veterans who don't have service-related illnesses or who can't meet a strict means test. Yet these grievances are about access to the system, not about the quality of care received by those who get in. Veterans groups tenaciously defend the VHA and applaud its turnaround. "The quality of care is outstanding," says Peter Gayton, deputy director for veterans affairs and rehabilitation at the American Legion. In the latest independent survey, 81 percent of VHA hospital patients express satisfaction with the care they receive, compared to 77 percent of Medicare and Medicaid patients.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0501.longman.html



Measurements: Between 1997 and 2000, quality was measured by using a chart-based quality instrument consisting of 348 indicators targeting 26 conditions. Results were adjusted for clustering, age, number of visits, and medical conditions.

Results: Patients from the VHA scored significantly higher for adjusted overall quality (67% vs. 51%; difference, 16 percentage points <95% CI, 14 to 18 percentage points>), chronic disease care (72% vs. 59%; difference, 13 percentage points ), and preventive care (64% vs. 44%; difference, 20 percentage points ), but not for acute care. The VHA advantage was most prominent in processes targeted by VHA performance measurement (66% vs. 43%; difference, 23 percentage points ) and least prominent in areas unrelated to VHA performance measurement (55% vs. 50%; difference, 5 percentage points ).

http://www.annals.org/cgi/content/full/141/12/938
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crickets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 02:11 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Excellent information, great idea. Thank you. -nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gkhouston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #11
15. It's true. I worked with a lot of retired vets when I lived in DC and they all
had very positive things to say about the healthcare they received. One of them had a complicated condition requiring multiple surgeries and a lot of specialist care. No hassles or big delays getting any of that care. I can't imagine how long it would have taken me to have gotten similar treatment approved, scheduled, and executed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PHIMG Donating Member (814 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
13. Democratic leadership is owned by Corporate America
Wanna know who's in control of the Democratic Party? The ones that can write multiple $4,600 checks. And they don't want government to work for people they want government to work for THEM.

It's the same reason there is no attempt to rein in campaign finance, etc.

They like the broken health care system the way it is today; it earns them money.
They like the broken cash-and-carry democracy the way it is now; it earns them money.

It will be this way until there is a real challenge from the left. The left needs a less crazy Perot of its own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DKRC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. +1
and welcome to DU!

:hi:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomCADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-07-09 06:30 PM
Response to Original message
17. I Disagree With The Notion That It Would Be Easy Under Any Strategy
Indeed, wouldn't opening with Medicare for all actually mean that the socialized medicine rants are a little more closer to the truth? My take is that there is a reason why there has not been reform for decades, and it is wishful thinking to assume that neat little packaging would make the process any easier.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC