Health care should be about people, not profits!

HealthCareThere is a common misconception that government-subsidized health care means that recipients will not have quality, efficient and timely medical care. I have been in the nursing profession since the 1980s and have yet to see a patient who had to wait for months to receive needed medical treatment because he had Medicare, Medicaid or veterans’ benefits.

The biggest problem is the cost of health care and health insurance, which has risen so dramatically that both are now unaffordable to the average American.

Many who do not qualify for government-subsidized health plans also are considered uninsurable by private companies. Private insurers often deny coverage to those with pre-existing conditions or illnesses. For those unlucky individuals, there are no options available for coverage. In addition, having private insurance does not always guarantee that a person receives affordable, adequate or timely care. Private insurers are profit-driven, and patients are sometimes forced to fight a bureaucratic nightmare to get coverage.

Many employers can no longer afford to subsidize health insurance benefits for their employees. It’s unrealistic to think that local charities and community clinics can bear the burden of caring for the increasing number of citizens who no longer have health care benefits.

The notion that America’s health care system is going to be socialized based on Canada’s model is a myth promoted by those with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. However, having a national health insurance plan with affordable premiums for uninsured and uninsurable Americans is necessary to meet the needs of those who have no other choice available to them.

It is critical that Americans work to solve the very real health care crisis in our country, and quit buying into the fear tactics and propaganda promoted by those profiting from the current system.

MARY C

The above letter to the editor appeared in today’s Wichita Eagle, and was written by a blogging friend of many who blog here.  I thought everyone should read it!

fnord

14 Comments

Filed under Healthcare

14 responses to “Health care should be about people, not profits!

  1. It is amazing how people put their own knowledge of the inadequacies of our care system aside based on the talking points of their radio heroes. I’ve got someone I supervise who is currently out for surgery. He constantly complains about our inadequate insurance, will howl about how much this surgery will cost him and how miserable his experience will have been.

    The same guy will spout Limbaugh, chapter and verse, in opposition to any reform of the system he hates.

    If he read this, I question if he’d ever recieve the well written message.

  2. I hear you, oma. Some will cut their nose off to spite their face and never even realize what they’re doing because the talking points, the exaggerations, the contentious attitude they’ve been told is appropriate will keep them from seeing the reality.

    Mary is a cancer survivor, her husband is still recovering (doing well!) from a heart attack and surgery to repair damage earlier this year. She also works as a health care professional — she knows this topic from all sides!

  3. What kind of health care do lawmakers and Obama get?

    Obama and members of Congress are among the more than 8 million federal employees, retirees and dependents who get their insurance through the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, the largest employer-sponsored health insurance program in the country.

    Because of its size, the program offers federal workers dozens of health plans to choose from, instead of the two or three that corporations and businesses typically offer their workers.

    Like everyone else in the federal plan, what Obama and lawmakers pay depends on the level of coverage they choose. On average, the federal government pays 72 percent of the total premium.

    “The federal employee plan is more generous than coverage most people have in the private sector,” said Mark McClellan, a health care analyst at the Brookings Institution and a former Food and Drug Administration commissioner under President George W. Bush.

    “It’s probably similar to coverage that people in large established corporations get, and better than what you get if you’re in a small business. It’s not the creme de la creme, but it’s better than what most Americans are getting.”

    Lawmakers also receive perks beyond the federal care offerings. For an annual fee of $503, they can receive health services from the Office of the Attending Physician, a fully staffed $2.5 million medical office located in the Capitol. It’s primarily there to respond to emergency needs of lawmakers, staff and visitors to the Capitol. Its services include acute medical care, health assessments, X-ray, lab and diagnostic services.

    Lawmakers can also get medical treatment at military hospitals, including the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Md., where presidents get their annual check-ups, and at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington.”

  4. I still say that if we take all the people employed in government jobs (at ALL levels), the military, those who receive both Medicare and Medicaid benefits, we already have a majority of Americans on a public health care plan financed / subsidized by taxes.

    What would it cost to make it available to everyone? And isn’t it worth the cost? To me it is!

  5. Brittancus

    It is a shame that some Americans are so gullible, to the outlandish propaganda and lies spat in the newspapers, television and radio about Obama’s health care agenda. They have demonized the British, Canadian and other worthy plans. Hidden under a disguise cover, these radical entities are determined to keep the special interest organizations in absolute power. Comprising of the money-draining profitable insurance companies and their rich stockholders. They don’t want any changes to the broken system of medical care, because it will hurt the status quo. I was born in England, in the county of Sussex and until the inception of the European Union and the European Parliament dictating to Britain. That they must accept millions of foreign workers, the nations medical system was exemplary. I never had to wonder if I would have to file bankruptcy, to pay my medical bills, or listen to the incessant ring of debt collectors on the phone.

    On several occasions I ended up in the cottage hospital and their was never a cost applied to it, never a ream of paperwork. No doctor, no hospital or specialist ask me for my Social Security number, drivers license or if I was covered by a predatory for-profit insurer. Today the British Isles is being submerged under a barrage of legal and illegal immigrants, who have never paid into the system, have caused some rationing. Prior to the importation of foreign labor my trips to doctor, to hospital, the eye or a dentist was paid from my taxation. Unless we pass a national health care agenda, Americans will never know what it’s like to breeze through their lives, without worrying about paying for health care? Tell your Senators and Congressman you want an alternative to the–GET RICH– insurance companies, before a Universal health care is killed. 202-224-312 REMEMBER THE INVESTORS AND STOCKHOLDERS DON’T WANT THEIR PIECE OF THE $$$TRILLION$$$ DOLLAR PIE DISTURBED. EVEN SOME POLITICIANS HAVE THEIR DIRTY FINGERS IN THE PIE?
    AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE PRIVATE HEALTH CARE, A GOVERNMENT SINGLE PAYER SYSTEM WILL ASSIST IN REVITALIZING THE WILTING US ECONOMY.

    • Hi Brittancus and welcome to Prairie P&Ps!

      I like the way you think! You said it so well. Americans deserve affordable health care. We should take lessons from your country of birth — England! I think we have good leaders who will come through for WE THE PEOPLE!

  6. tosmarttobegop

    I agree Fnord, I also agree with Mary as for those who repeat Rush quite a few it is they do not see that Rush is talking about them too.

  7. lilacluvr

    Rush cannot afford to let Obama look good when it comes to reforming our healthcare mess.

    What if, God forbid, people actually liked the new health care options and started to think that Obama is not the ‘evil socialist’ Rush and other Republicans have been painting as being?

    Rush might just lose some of those precious dittoheads allegiance and the Republicans might actually have to learn to compromise with Obama and we could not have that, now could we?

  8. Mary did excellent as usual. For those of you who don’t know her, you are missing out…

    • Mentioned this on another post. Is everyone OK with a 7% national sales tax (ie VAT) to pay for this? So where I live for example the sales tax currently is 7% so it would become 14%

      • bear, I haven’t heard suggestions of paying for health care via sales tax. Where did you hear this?

        There are so many rumors I’m not willing to get caught up in them unless and until someone shows there is factual evidence one is more than a rumor.

      • Well in the comparisons to Canada, that is how they pay for their healthcare system with the VAT. Honestly, I haven’t seen a clear vision of how this is going to be paid for in the US so that’s why I bring it up.

  9. fnord

    I would be against sales taxes covering health care expenses. Those the sales tax affect most are the poorest. Now IF we excluded necessary items as some states already have, I would be more willing to listen to such a proposal.

    Here in Kansas the only item I know that is excluded from sales tax are prescription meds. We still pay sales tax on food.

    • Percentages are always going to have the greatest negative affect on those earning the least. When you’re trying to live on a dollar a seven percent reduction is noticed.