Presented to Cong. Jason Altmire at a PDA Roundtable Discussion on Healthcare on August 20, 2009

Perhaps the biggest sticking point in the single payer/national healthcare argument is cost. If you look at the system of healthcare we have now, it’s hard to imagine being able to provide that to everyone in the country.

But study after study indicates that we can.

June 1991, General Accounting office: “If the US were to shift to a system of universal coverage and a single payer, as in Canada, the savings in administrative costs (10% of health spending) would be more than enough to offset the expense of universal coverage.

December 1991, Congressional Budget Office: “(a) single payer system that paid providers at Medicare’s rates, that population that is currently uninsured could be covered without dramatically increasing national spending on health.”

Continue reading Can the US Afford Single Payer Healthcare? Yes! →

A new study shows that the Massachusetts model for national healthcare reform is a failure. Taxpayer subsidized insurance and forcing citizens to buy insurance is supported by the insurance industry and their bought politicians such as US Sen. Max Baucus.

The Massachusetts Reform:
A Rerun of Past State Reforms That Have Failed

Back in 1988, Massachusetts passed a universal health care law very similar to the 2006 reform.   Since 1988, many states—Oregon, Minnesota Tennessee, Vermont, Washington and Maine—have enacted reforms aimed at achieving universal coverage.  All failed.

These reforms differed in detail, but shared common elements. All offered new public subsidies or expanded Medicaid for poor and near-poor people. All left the majority of private health insurance arrangements undisturbed, although many included new insurance regulations or state purchasing pools to help make affordable coverage available to individuals or small businesses. Some (Massachusetts 1988, Oregon 1992, Washington State 1993) contained mandates on employers or self-employed individuals.

None of these reforms made more than a temporary dent in the number of uninsured.   These incremental reforms failed because they did not include effective cost-control measures. As health costs rose, legislatures backed off from forcing employers and the self-employed from paying ever-rising premiums and the mandates were repealed. Relying on Medicaid was fiscally problematic for states because tax revenues fall at the same time that unemployment pushes families out of private coverage.   There is little reason to think that the current Massachusetts reform, or a national plan modeled on these state reforms, would have any better long-term success.

Is there an alternative to this model?

Yes. A bill in Congress, the United States National Health Care Act, H.R. 676   (also known as “The Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act”) would implement single-payer financing of health care while maintaining the private delivery system. A single-payer program would eliminate private insurers and use the administrative savings to provide comprehensive coverage for all. Features of the single-payer plan include:

• Comprehensive coverage for all, including doctor, hospital, long-term, mental health, dental and vision care as well as prescription drugs and medical supplies.
• No premiums, co-payments, or deductibles that inhibit access to care and unfairly burden the poor.
• Free choice of doctor and hospital and an end to insurance company and HMO dictates over patient care.
• Pays for itself by eliminating wasteful private insurance administration and profit. A progressive tax would replace what is currently paid out-of-pocket.
• Controls costs so benefits are sustainable through negotiated physician fees, global budgets for hospitals and bulk purchasing of prescription drugs and medical supplies.  A single-payer system would facilitate health planning to reestablish the balance between preventive and primary care on one hand, and high-tech tertiary care on the other.

The nation must not look to Massachusetts’ health reform as a model. If we truly want to provide comprehensive health care for all of us at a price we can afford, we must adopt a single-payer plan.

Read the complete analysis here: http://www.citizen.org/hrg/articles.cfm?ID=18395

Single Payer Rally at Burlington Healthcare Forum

Burlington Free Press

March 18, 2009

Single-payer health care system touted

150 rally in support of concept at regional forum at UVM

By Nancy Remsen, Free Press Staff Writer  

Dr. John Walsh, a neuroscience researcher from Worcester, Mass., stood Tuesday with 150 other sign-carrying supporters of government-financed health care outside the building where 400 invited guests would attend a regional health care reform forum sponsored by the Obama White House.

Walsh passed out yellow fliers that denounced President Barack Obama for failing to live up to promises to consider a Canadian-style health insurance system. “Single payer is the choice in the polls,” Walsh declared.

Sandy Eaton of Quincy, Mass., and a member of the Massachusetts Nurses Association, came to the only forum scheduled for the Northeast to add his voice to those demanding that national policymakers weigh the merits of a government-financed system when they discuss reform options. “Let’s make sure there is a fair and legitimate comparison,” Eaton said.

Rebecca Elgie, a retired teacher, traveled six hours from Ithaca, N.Y., because she has made advocacy for a single-payer system her cause. Three years ago she walked 400 miles across her state to raise awareness about the need for a better way to pay for health care. Elgie said, “The employee-based system has outlived its usefulness.”

The rally greeted the invited guests as they strolled toward the Davis Center at the University of Vermont under a bright blue sky. “They need to know there is enough support for people to drop everything and come here to support single payer,” said Dr. Deb Richter, a Montpelier family physician and prime force in the single-payer movement in Vermont.

Continue reading Demand for Single Payer Healthcare Heard Inside and Outside Burlington Forum →