Health

Rant

Is this Democracy?

Posted 30 months ago|7 comments|362 views
Written by
Altruist
Eugene, OR
Is This Democracy?
The current health care debate is instructive. Conservatives claim that we have the best health care system in the world, and that may be true for the rich white Congressmen who make these claims because they have a government run health care program and can afford the best of care. For the rest of us though, health insurance costs are doubling and out of range for 50 million. Three times that many are underinsured. We pay twice what other civilized countries pay, yet most health indicators rate our country near the bottom. 20,000 people die each year because they don’t have health care and 65% of bankruptcies are because people can’t afford health related problems even though many of those were insured. Insurance company bureaucrats dictate care, treatment, length of hospital stays, and essentially who lives and who dies.

Because of these problems most unions, doctors, nurses, AARP, most hospitals, health care institutions and nearly three fourths of the population is in favor of radically changing the health care system. There are no shortage of models in the world that work to emulate. As a matter of fact any other system would beat ours. The simplest and most cost effective is a single payer health care system. It should be a done deal, a slam dunk. We voted for change and the Democrats have enough votes to override vetoes.

And yet inexplicably Single payer is taken off the table and a public health insurance plan which is a shabby second is being dumped. What is the problem?
The problem is money of course. Not how to pay for it. If we paid half what we do to the insurance companies we would have a great system. The problem is that everyone in Congress that has anything to do with making legislation has received wheelbarrows of money from the insurance industry to maintain the status quo.

I thought that in a democracy representatives were supposed to represent the people, or if they were smarter and better informed than the general public, be capable of making informed decisions that are best for the long term good of the nation, even if they have to vote against their constituants. Instead they are voting their pocketbook. How is this different than the most corrupt banana republic, where public officials have to be bribed to get anything done?

Part of the problem is that the rich, the powerful, and the corporations run the country by bribing the leaders, but the other half of the problem is that a two party system in inherently dysfunctional. The party in power can garner all of the K street donations and perpetuate their rule until they over reach and are thrown out and then the other party takes over until they over reach and are thrown out. In the meantime the minority party can only obstruct so very little ever gets done.

It is much easier to obstruct progress than it is to provide workable alternatives to solve the problem. Republicants have decided that they will just say no. They are doing every thing they can think of to make Obama and the Democrats fail, even though failure would be disastrous for the nation. They have become masters at framing issues, and have learned how to scare the heck out of everyone through very effective propaganda and by just plain lying. They and their corporate sponsors have paid for “Think Tanks” Talk show hosts (Rush, Glen Beck and the rest of Hate radio), and entire television networks (Fox), and they maintain remarkable discipline because they control the faucet of corporate money. Grover Norquist and his “Americans For Tax Reform” has gotten 90% of Republican legislators and 60% of republican governors to pledge that they will never raise taxes for any reason. That is why we don’t pay for two wars and have given tax cuts to the rich, while the gap between the super rich and the rest of us skyrockets. They have doubled the national debt to $11.3 trillion, and the interest on our borrowing will soon become the government’s greatest expense, and still they resist all forms of revenue or any kind of sacrifice. The Republicans meet to discuss “Talking Points and they all go out and spread the word from their identical scripts, and anyone who doesn’t tow the party line has their funding shut off and challengers funded instead. Norquist who does not have any elected position, is probably the second most powerful person in the country.

The Republicans are very effective at spreading fear and feeding paranoia. They dragged us into an unnecessary war, based upon nothing but lies. This did enormous harm to the nations reputation and worldwide standing and made us less safe. Now they are using the same tactics to destroy the country. They confuse old people and make them think the government is trying to kill them off and to take away their Medicare. They feed the fear of the radical Christians claiming that the plan will fund abortions. They feed the fear of the nationalists claiming it will be Socialized medicine. It is all totally laughable except that the public is so gullible and succumbs to the constant organized drumbeat of lies from many sources every day. The internet multiplies the problems by spreading falsehoods virulently and providing web sites that spread and verify the lies. People listen to what they want to hear, and read what they want to believe. No one uses factcheck.org, politifact.com or other non biased fact checkers, it is too easy to believe what feeds their paranoia.

It doesn’t matter if change is desperately needed, if the plans make sense, if they save money and lives, if the Dems propose it, the Republicants are against it. The Dems have been bending over backwards for bipartisanship. They have totally emasculated their energy and health care plans in the attempt to gain Republican votes, but they receive no Republicant votes no matter what they do. They have made all kinds of concessions to satisfy the Republicants, the Blue Dogs, The corporations, but nobody is representing what is best for the nation and the people.

It used to be said that politics is the art of compromise, but it isn’t politics if one side compromises and the other side doesn’t bend. It is simply capitulation to the bullies. If the Republicants refuse to play fair and bargain in good faith, the Democrats will be forced to just cut them out of the picture with a reconciliation bill. If the Republicants will never vote for any health care reform, no matter how watered down the spineless Democrats make it, why don’t we just do it right and go back to what we know works for the rest of the world and for half of our own population? Half of our country now has single payer government health care. The vets, the aged, the very poor, children, and the politicians, all enjoy “Socialized Medicine”, and they are all happy with their care and it costs much less and is more efficient than the private plans. Why not just extend those existing plans to cover everyone? Why not save 20,000 lives a year? Why not reduce the cost of healthcare by half and reduce our deficit? Is it because half a million insurance crooks will loose jobs? How about the three million health care jobs that will be created?

Doing nothing is the worst of all possible choices. Costs will spiral out of control and the Insurance Industry will deny more and more people so they can get richer as more and more people die. If those with an irrational fear of “socialized Medicine” fear government plans, let them help the insurance industry out by buying supplemental insurance for “Cadillac plans that will pay for their Viagra and face lifts.

Health care should be a guaranteed right and the World Health Organization recognizes that right. Don’t let the greedy health industries and their paid off toadies deny 50 million people their basic rights, and deny the rest of us the right to have affordable care we can count on.

The best way to pay for health care is to place a tax on alcohol, tobacco, poisons in our water and air, sugar and other substances that degrade our health. This would discourage unhealthy behavior which would further save costs.

To end our dysfunctional political system we would need to get money out of politics, have at least three viable parties, and fix the system so third party votes will not be thrown away as spoiler votes. Currently the country is just about evenly divided between Democrats, Republicans and Independents, but the independents are left out of the system. Having preferential voting would alleviate the dysfunctional gridlock. Currently both parties cater to their extremes. If we required at least three alternative bills for every problem, and representatives voted their preferences, 3 pts. for what they like the most 2 pts. for second place and 1 pt. for what they like the most, the bill with the most points would win. In most cases if there were apples (Repubs), oranges (Dems) and fruit salad(Independents or centrists), the fruit salad would win. If both major parties had to compromise to get the support of the third party to win their support, their policies would be forced to move to the center and would then better represent the will of the majority. The same system would work for general elections if at least three nominees were required for every position, and people voted their preferences, the moderates would win, if they all had equal (public) funding. Until that happens we will not really be a democracy, we will be a corpocracy with our representatives owned by special interests.

We may not be able to fix the government right away, but we should all contact our representatives and tell them that if they don’t have the guts to support a single payer system to at the very least allow a public insurance option.
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
Colorado
Colorado
Westcliffe, CO
30 months ago: First, I do not follow the two major political parties because they are the same party, just like the frustration you are feeling above. Promise never meets the demand.

However, I do not feel that insurance is that expensive. I am perfectly willing to pay $100-180 for very good coverage that I have enjoyed. My health is more important to me than my crappy car, a big screen TV and other luxuries.

If I could not afford that small number a every month there are lots of other options. Smaller plans that are ok for around $50 a month. If I could still not afford that and was really down on my luck I could go to Medicare and they would probably give me something. If everything else above failed, I could go to a church backed clinic and apply free care which they would give me.

All of these things above have happened to me our close friends and family. We got the health care we needed and were not "STIFFED" by the evil corporations man. This world is about incentives and survival. Because I have liberty it is my choice of if I want health care and what type I want. I want the big "evil" corporations to make money because the more money they make, they better my coverage is, the better investment in new treatments, and the more the government GETS OFF MY BACK.
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
30 months ago: You are fortunate in receiving cheap insurance in Colorado. We also try to live very simply on $1200 a month. After I retired, my Cobra insurance would have been $800/mo. so we shopped around and found the cheapest plan in Oregon was $500 for a $5,000 deductible, and then I heard on the radio that company is notorious for stiffing its members. That is how the insurance industry makes it's money, by denying claims. Everyone is happy with the government run Medicare program which has 3% administrative costs compared to 20% for private, and they don't deny claims because of pre existing conditions like old age. why not expand that to everyone?
PS how can I edit rants? I made a mistake above about preference voting - 1 point for the plan they like the LEAST, not the most.
When I try to edit a rant I can't get to the body to change it, and the rant/rave people have not responded to my queries.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
30 months ago: Altruist and Colorado
You make some very good points. I believe in following the will of the people, also, but just saying "Let the government handle it" is a cop-out. The responsibility for making this work should reside with "we the people", not "them, the government". Why do you think this process is so difficult right now? I think it is because we have let more and more of the control of our government slip away over the years.

Also, insurance is affordable to many that don't have it simply because they would rather maintain a certain standard of living. They feel they are guaranteed happiness, rather than the pursuit of happiness, and for many, happiness lies in a new computer rig, ipod, flatscreen, or car. I can't count the times I talked to someone about the unaffordable nature of insurance while leaning against the fender of their shiny new automobile.
I prefer my 1999 Dodge pickup, I bought it secondhand, paid it off, and now can afford insurance. We are being sold a bill of goods, from "Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous" "Celebrity Cribs" or whatever else garbage they pump out so we feel possessions will somehow give us happiness. Then we find possessions don't bring happiness, and we become morally bankrupt in the search.

Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
30 months ago: The stages of civilization have been listed as such by a smarter man than me:

1. From bondage to spiritual faith;

2. From spiritual faith to great courage;

3. From courage to liberty;

4. From liberty to abundance;

5. From abundance to complacency;

6. From complacency to apathy;

7. From apathy to dependence;

8. From dependence back into bondage.

What I am hoping is that we can go from apathy back to great courage, through a universal awakening, and not into more dependence.

The answer to your question is yes and no, we are no longer a pure democracy, if even we ever were, we have strong oligarchical tendencies, where the Golden Rule is the law of the land.(He Who Has the Gold Makes the Rules) That is not the insurance companies, the energy companies, or the banks. The roots to these interests are far deeper, and well hidden on both sides of the political aisle. The game of give and take we think we are playing with them is always more give than take. Most people are not opposed to universal health care, they are opposed to giving control of it to a corrupt government.


Suppose we do let the government take over all insurance, and let government dictate how physicians dispense care. Once again, you have your special interest groups meddling in the legislation concerning who gets to do what to whom. Then, your popular opinion polls will indicate letting certain groups either do without lifestyle specific illness care, or have to pay more. What happens then to Aids patients, unwanted pregnancies, smokers, overweight people, drug abusers, athletes(prone to injuries) and we are right back in the same boat.
The supplemental insurance companies do a booming business by offering insurance to take up the slack left by inadequate coverage by our government provided Medicare program.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
30 months ago: We don't need to rush headlong into "Whatever we can get" out of fear that the tides will turn, because as the old saying goes, "haste makes waste", and "fools rush in".
If this is the right thing to do, then it is worth doing right.
You are right on two things, government needs to be reformed back to being ruled of the people, and health care needs to be reformed, in that order.
30 months ago: Some very good points. Some thing I might add to the pot is I have spent time in Canada which has a nationalized form of medical care. I have a friend who's tonsils became infected. He was very sick and went into the doctor which gave him antibiotics. He got well but they became infected again and again they gave him antibiotics. this continued time after time each time my friend was very miserable and in bed sick as a dog missing work and pay. After several times the doctors prescribed surgery but the surgery kept getting pushed back and meanwhile my friend went through the cycles again and again. It took over a year before he finally got the tonsils removed.
30 months ago: What the point is and what people who want government medical seem to miss is that my friend no longer had control. Canadians medical care is no longer in they're control they do not have the freedom to chose who they're Doctor will be or which doctor will perform the surgery or even when that surgery will be. This is freedom sacrificed for government handouts. Yes medical is high in this country but it is in large part due to frivolous law suits and Medicare and Medicaid (government programs). Yes there are many examples of nationalized healthier programs out there and since it seems we will get it whether we like it or not I am hoping if that is the case it is at least the best of these examples. But I feel OOTB and Colorado both have good points. If a person came to our church asking for help to see a doctor I am sure we would help. I think people think they will be free to not ask for charity with "free" medical yet we will all become medical dependants of the state and subject to the governments rules of medical rationing.
OOTB also made a very good point in that if Americans priorities were in the right place I doubt if any American could not afford insurance of some reasonable type. A new car loses 40%-60% of it's value in the first three years. This is a terrible investment yet I suspect many people who support nationalized health care insist upon having a new car. The idea I feel is that the "rich" will pay for it and they can better afford that new vehicle.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.