Here are some other single payer health care resources, in case anyone is interested:

Physicians for Natl Health Plan

http://www.pnhp.org/facts/single_payer_resources.php

A single-payer system would be financed by eliminating private insurers and recapturing their administrative waste. Modest new taxes would replace premiums and out-of-pocket payments currently paid by individuals and business. Costs would be controlled through negotiated fees, global budgeting and bulk purchasing.

What the “Mass. Plan” would do: (why it wont work)
http://www.pnhp.org/single_payer_resources/individual_mandates_the_massachusetts_plan.php

In April 2006, Massachusetts passed an “individual mandate” bill, legislation which requires all residents to buy a private health insurance plan or face a tax penalty. Some subsidies are provided for low-income residents, and a new state agency was created to assist residents in finding a plan. Two months later the American Medical Association endorsed the mandate concept and a number of state legislatures introduced copycat bills.

But as Drs. David Himmelstein and Steffie Woolhandler point out in this editorial response, individual mandates offer a false promise of universal coverage. Mandate proponents promise comprehensive coverage at a low cost, but the exorbitant price of private coverage (averaging $3,500 for an individual and $10,000 for a family) means that many families will have to decide between financial hardship and low-premium plans that offer no coverage worthy of the name.

Moreover, individual mandates do nothing to control the rising cost of care, continuing to funnel health dollars though wasteful private insurers and hospitals. Instead, they mandate that cost of covering the uninsured should be incurred by the uninsured themselves.

California Nurses Assoc.:
http://www.guaranteedhealthcare.org/

And the petition:
http://ga1.org/campaign/singlepayer?

HR 676 (Conyers, Kucinich and others) US Natl Health Care Act (*Medicare for all)
http://www.pnhp.org/publications/united_states_national_health_care_act_hr_676.php

Sen. Sanders , S.703 (mostly state and local health care based—but better than Baucus, Kennedy idea)
http://www.pnhp.org/blog/2009/03/27/sen-bernie-sanders-introduces-single-payer-bill/

If anyone has anymore, please, lets let Congress and the President know that we need CARE for every PATIENT and CITIZEN, not “insurance for consumers”.

Obama isn’t just a Democrat, he’s a special kind of Democrat. A Chicago Democrat.

To understand exactly what that means, this article might help.

Mark—I see that you can do things other than fax—-thanks for the link!!! Its one I didnt know about…

Mark E. Smith—Max Baucus recieved $500,000 from health industry executive for his next campaign. I hope to f*ck he loses. Sell out.

I cannot fax, but I agree with the letter.

Rep Conyers, as you know, came up with HR 676—Medicare for ALL. He asked Pres. Obama if he was to attend the health care forums. Pres. Obama told him no. After a flood of emails and calls, Pres. Obama recanted, Conyers attended , but was ignored, as is anyone who brings up single payer or, now, even a good public option!!.

Physicians for Health Reform, California Nurses, and others have been trying to keep up the fight for single payer, while sell-outs like Families USA continues to block them. Two Union s have completely pulled out of talks. Pres. Obama may not find himself with such massive union support in 2012, but, you know how the leadership of these Unions tells it, “Its better than (fill in the blank)”. and “If we dont support the Dems…”. Union structure is broken in this country.

I will try to go to the link and see what else you can do besides fax…

Might as well post the FAX I refer to in my comment below. Some might want to send it to Pelosi or the White House themselves, by fax, email, or phone, if they can get through. Funny how an administration that welcomes public input doesn’t seem to bother taking public input into consideration when decisions are made.

TO: Representative Nancy Pelosi.

CC: Dan Bernal (Legislative Aide to Representative Pelosi), Joe Segal (Aide to Representative Conyers), Senator Max Baucus, The White House Office of Health Reform

PUT SINGLE PAYER ON THE AGENDA

Dear Ms. Pelosi and Others,

You have stated, “In our caucus, over and over again, we hear single payer, single payer, single payer. Well, it’s not going to be a single payer.” Your legislative aide, Mr. Bernal, claims that you have long been a single payer advocate but simply need the American people to give you the political backing to enact single payer. He said “Speaker Pelosi has been in favor of single-payer for a long time. . . . Now make us do it.” Mr. Bernal asked “Where are the meetings with Sen. Baucus and other key . . . members? Where are the phone calls, e-mails and faxes in support of single-payer?” Let me address these points seriatim.

First, if you are a single payer advocate as Mr. Bernal says you are, then why do you not have the courage to stand up and say so? Why are you so vehemently ruling out single payer health care when 59% of American people and 59% of American doctors want it, according to a February 2009 CBS/NYT poll. Are you afraid of being Harry-and-Louised? Why not look at what will happen if you don’t stand up? You will be ‘Miked.” Take a look at the Mike Farrell videos at http://www.1payer.net/videos/medicare-for-all.html

Second, you know very well where the meetings with Sen. Baucus and other “key” members are. They never happened because Sen. Baucus, like you, has ruled out single payer from the very beginning. He refuses to meet with single payer advocates. He refuses to put single payer on the agenda for discussion.

Third, your aide asked, “Where are the faxes?” The faxes and calls and emails have been coming to you but you and your colleagues have been ignoring them. You are comfortable with your Federal Health Plan while we have to suffer. We will no longer suffer in silence. You may have decided to stick your fingers in your ears and sing “I can’t hear you, I can’t hear you” again and again, but I wager you will hear us loud and clear in the next election if you disappoint us now on health care.

How do we break through the willful silence of Congress and the White House? Senators and Representatives make email contact nearly impossible and usually pointless. The White House comment line is busy during business hours and closed at all other times. The White House edits one of our spokespersons out of the video of the Iowa meeting and refuses to invite acknowledged experts until we threaten a picket line. Do we have to break down your communications system in order to get our message across? If that is what it takes, then we will do our best.

Yours Truly,

A Frustrated Angry American Taxpayer, Your Boss
———-

There was a box to add a personal comment, so mine was:

It isn’t your table. It is our table. Rigged elections do not convey an invitation to our table, no less ownership of it. Your contempt for your constituents due to the total lack of accountability in our system prove that despite the rigged elections, you do not have the consent of the governed and represent only your selfish self.

KDelphi, there was a fax flood to Pelosi yesterday—I was one of about a thousand people to send a fax and it seems to have successfully flooded her fax machine.

You can read about it and sign up for their next action here:

http://www.1payer.net/action-alerts.html

They’ll probably switch to email, if they can verify that it will actually get to Pelosi. Many members of Congress only accept email from people in their Congressional district.

I doubt if it will do any good. Because there is no accountability, our fascist masters know that it doesn’t matter if 100% of their constituents want something, they are under no obligation to represent us because we can’t hold them accountable.

But it doesn’t hurt to send an email or a fax, and it helps more people understand that just because people call themselves representatives does NOT mean that they represent us.

foggyjones—I empathize, and, trying to maintain Medicaid has drastically changed the decisions that i make about my life. It is wrong. My entire family has been dessimated by the neo-liberal death care system. we still will never pay off all the bills.

I did a Work Study program in Europe years ago, in college. That was about 25 yrs ago. I was treated in Denmark, Norway and Italy (also Canada—and Mexico) I was convinced that we had to have the same natl care here. I never dreamed that, 25 yrs later, I would still be hearing this crap!

The “free mkt” “solution” that Baucus ( and, sad to say, Kennedy) are promoting is a disaster. It will just push more onto Medicaid, which is already so crowded as to make my drs fall back on charity care very often. Rep Pelosi just said it yesterday, “We keep hearing from constiuants, ‘single payer’. Well thats not gonna happen. We tried that”. Which is so much bullshit! We never tried to pass a non-profit based system. So, voting Dem, for me, is never going to happen either.

I also worked as aN MSW for many years, and,saw people die because their Medicaid and/or HMO would not cover lifesaving treatment. Two people in my family have had cancer, and thought that they were covered. We still pay the bills.

I put what Med doesnt cover on my credit card, which just increased my percentage rate by about 8 points.If I lived in a civilized country, it would be considered a human right…I am TRYING to go back to work part time, but, I* am waiting for a family member to talk to an attorney they know, to see if I will lose my crappy Medicaid coverage! How is THAT “saving anyone money”?

If they pass what they are presenting now, things will be like Massachusetts….where 250,000 are still not covered and it is bankrupting the state. Ot is the cost of insurance and inflated fees to specialists.

As you probably know. there is Rep Conyers HR 676 , as well as Sen Sanderws more-state-based approach. Either one would be better than what we are going to get. If it costs too much, GOP will “
blame the poor” like they always do.

Boggs, the insurance companies aren’t scared. Obama and Pelosi have taken single-payer off the table. So any health care plan passed by Congress will be a give-away to the insurance companies in defiance of the will of the American people who are powerless to stop it.

KDelphi, if you are driving a car and see that you’re about to run over a small child, you don’t have to have formal alternative plans in order to step on the brakes and avoid catastrophe.

First you stop authorizing (by voting) the genocides, the torture, the bailouts, etc., and once the catastrophes have been averted, you formalize alternatives.

Remember the old joke, “Where are we going….and what are we doing in this handbasket?”

Once you know where continuing politics as usual will take us, it is time to jump out of that handbasket. I do understand the fear of jumping from the frying pan into the fire, but I don’t think it applies when we’re already in the fire.

There is no greater evil than crimes against humanity that violate the Nuremberg Principles and international law, and that’s what our government is doing. For those who care only about themselves, the fact that our government is deliberately wrecking our economy should be enough to motivate them.

The first step is to stop delegating our power to a government we cannot hold accountable, and to retain that power ourselves. After that we can work to establish a form of government where the power is vested in the people (the definition of democracy), and I trust the people to act in their own best interests. I do NOT trust government to do so.

Those who think otherwise are living in a dream world. Our health care system is the most expensive and one of the least effective in the world. Our economy is one of the least stable. Our foreign policy gains us nothing but enemies. Wherever people have power over government, there are effective national health care plans, a relatively stable economy, and saner foreign policies. Are we inherently the most stupid and incompetent people in the whole world? I think not. I think we’re at least as smart and competent as anyone else and at least as capable of self-governance.

Diamond, since only about half of America’s electorate vote in any given presidential election, and the vote is usually close to evenly divided between the Democratic candidate and the Republican candidate (with a very small percentage voting third party), NO American President is elected with much more than 25% of the vote.

Since our Constitution does not allow us to vote directly for President and Vice-President, but only for the slate of electors of the political parties to which they belong, it is merely a symbolic vote anyway. In 2000 the Supreme Court stopped the vote count and Bush was sworn in without the popular vote even having been fully counted. The Supreme Court decided that it might hurt Bush’s feelings if the votes were actually counted, so they didn’t allow it to happen. In 2004, once again the President was sworn in before the popular vote count had been completed, because John Kerry broke his promise to his voters to ensure that their votes were counted, and conceded early, before their votes could be counted.

In 2008, there was no need to count the votes because both candidates were committed to continuing and expanding the Bush wars of aggression based on the Bush lies, and the Bush bailouts based on Bush gratitude towards the wealthy elite who had put him in office twice without regard to the popular vote.

Who do you think started the war in Afghanistan, Bush or Obama? Right now there are bombs (oh, those are bombs?) raining down death on innocent children in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Is that what you voted for? Is that what you wanted? Should the families of the dead children thank you for voting to continue the Bush genocide?

(continued)

Whether you voted for Obama, who was committed to maintaining a U.S. presence in Iraq and expanding the war in Afghanistan, for McCain who was committed to maintaining a U.S. presence in Iraq and expanding the war in Afghanistan, or for a third party candidate with no chance of winning the election, by voting you were delegating your power and granting your consent to wars of aggression, torture, bailouts, and anything else the winning candidate wanted to do, no matter which candidate won, because you have no power to impeach them—not even for crimes against humanity. Only Congress can impeach, and if they have voted FOR those crimes against humanity, they aren’t likely to impeach anybody. And you can’t put pressure on Congress because the Constitution allows you to vote for them, but not to remove them from office—only they have the power to remove themselves, something they have shown themselves very unlikely to do.

When you vote for people committed to policies you oppose (if you oppose bombing innocent children), or in an election where the only candidates with any chance of winning are committed to those policies, you are granting your consent to those policies. Are those of us opposed to genocide supposed to thank you?

When Reagan was elected the CIA had already been rigging and interfering with elections in other countries for decades. Reagan was supposedly elected due to a phenomenon called “the Reagan Democrats” where people whose parents had been lifelong straight-ticket Democratic Party voters, and who themselves had also been lifelong straight-ticket Democratic Party voters like their parents, suddenly decided to vote for a Republican at the head of the ticket. Undoubtedly there were some who voted for Reagan because they’d seen him on TV. But if you’ve ever tried to convince a lifelong straight-ticket Democratic Party voter to vote for a Republican, you might wonder if there were really enough of them to sway an election. Or if it was possible, that even back then before anyone was paying attention, the elections were being rigged here just as our CIA was rigging elections in Mexico and other countries at the time.

I’m not talking about revenge, I’m talking about democracy and accountability. Some people actually care about things like that—we’re the ones you voters who don’t really care about anything at all, least of all things like bombing innocent children, call “apathetic.”

You were trying to appear opposed to bombs, right? Not just about Republicans doing the bombing instead of Democrats doing the bombing? Or is which party does the bombing the only thing you care about?

In a winner-take-all, two-party system, with no accountability, and an election where both major candidates are committed to bombing, anyone who votes is authorizing bombs. I’m opposed to bombing, so I’m not going to thank you.

The insurance companies are scared to death-they know they can’t compete with medicare like policies. The only clients they will have are the wealthy and a lot of those tight fisted ones might even opt for the universal program.
Insurance companies will have to come up with additional fear policies like their long-term care and catastrophic and cancer plans.

I agree that not voting would be the answer. I just have no idea how you would make a mass movement of it. I guess that people will have to suffer more, unfortunately.

I agree that the duopoly is just Tweedle-dum and tweedledumbass. But just sitting home and not voting, does not a Reevolution make. There has to be a alternative and some folow up.

Standing up to the powers that be is something that ‘Merkins have not done in a long time…that doesnt mean that we cannot.

As long as most think that switching back and forth , between the two parties, is “change”,,,well, we’re screwed. Neo-liberal, neo-con…its best, I think, to say, “do this” , instead of just saying “dont do this”. Otherwise, people are too set in their ways to just stop doing something.

I gave up on both parties, after Clinton.

Yes! Of course! The perfect form of revenge: not voting. Why didn’t I think of that? You might want to reconsider when you realize that Ronald Reagan became President on 31% of the vote. That means nearly 70% of Americans either didn’t vote for him or didn’t vote. A grateful world thanks them all for the many benefits that rained down on them (oh, those were bombs?) during the rule of the Halloween mask from the Actors’ union. Anyone who can vote and doesn’t, is a moron.

Thanks for the reading tip, Leefeller.

You might find this post and my response to it of interest:

http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/show.cgi?8/80318

It looks like the Haitians are fed up and only 5% of them intend to vote in their next election.

Mark E. Smith,

Appreciate your comprehensive comment. The two party system has always seemed a scam to me, the grand illusion,  a choreographed dance of differences, but business as usual.  Accepting the reality of a plutocracy of elite special interests always pulling the strings. Not voting has some merit, George Carlin, said the same thing. “Why vote, they do what they want anyway”? (sic)
Not sure Carlin was apathetic, he sounded very much like Mark E. Smith the politics.

Over time as I have assimilated ideas,  I have always questioned the concept of following the pack, flock or lemmings, as one prefers to call them.  Individualism has it’s negative baggage according to the flock mentality, from our societys programed lack of reason. From religion to politics, people are impelled into group mentality. 

Recently reading Eric Hoffer, I find many insightful thoughts from his writings.  Originally my question was why do people feel the impelling need to proselytize their beliefs, at the time I was referring to religion.  Hoffer’s bookso far has addressed this question very well for me. Maybe you have already read it, “The True Believer” by “Eric Hoffer” it seems extremely enlightening so far.

Some highlights are the concept of Mass movements and why they happened.  He explains his ideas of hope and change, the ground work for Mass movements. He goes into it much deeper and explains very clearly why things happen. If you have not read it, I would highly recommend it. Though written years ago, it seems up to date for the present.

Again, I appreciate your comments and find them worthy of consideration, maybe just in memory of George Carlin. RIP. I may follow your guideline and not vote.

Leefeller, it all depends upon whether people can grasp that what is theirs, is theirs.

That their tax money is their tax money.

That their country is their country.

That they are better qualified to know what they want than anyone else is, and more apt to vote for what they want than anyone else is.

Of the 90% who opposed the bailouts, half turned around and voted to let somebody they could not hold accountable make that decision for them, so they were either pretending to oppose the bailouts and feigning anger, when they secretly wanted to hand over the national treasury to the banksters and crooks, or else they knowingly voted against their own interests.

How many of them would take their paycheck and hand it over to Obama, Bernanke, Geithner, or Summers to decide whether and how they could spend it? So why did they hand over the national treasury to these guys? Don’t they trust themselves to act in their own interests? Don’t they know that they work as hard for their tax money as they do for their take-home pay? If they’re too lazy to decide how to spend their hardearned money, why aren’t they too lazy to work?

I think they got conned. Swindled. I think the wealthy elite and the big corporations spent millions funding and promoting the elections and the candidates, and the political parties went around and talked to people one-on-one and asked for their support and told them that if they didn’t vote, something terrible would happen, or shamed them into voting by saying that anyone who cares enough to safeguard their money and their rights, instead of recklessly delegating their power to candidates they can’t hold accountable, is apathetic.

I don’t know why people continue to deliberately vote against their own self-interests, Leefeller. Maybe some of them are just young and naive and actually believe campaign lies. Some are undoubtedly doing what their parents did, not realizing that times may have changed. I do know that many cannot distinguish between a vote and a voice in government, so they think that their vote is their voice, when it is actually the voice of the big corporations and the wealthy elite they are delegating their power to. Many minorities and women believe that people fought and died for their right to vote, and don’t understand that a vote is worthless unless it constitutes a real voice in government.

About half of us already get it. We know better than to vote for people we can’t hold accountable. Those who continue to vote, and continue to complain bitterly about everything they voted for, might really prefer complaining about the results of handing their money over to thieves, to the difficulty, exertion, and personal responsibility of keeping their wallets in their own pockets.

I’ve been an election boycott advocate for a couple of years now, and I’ve probably convinced fewer than a hundred people to stop voting. I’ve refuted all the canards (apathy, voice in government, the right to complain) literally thousands of times. I’ve endured vicious personal attacks by paid political party operatives angry that I might impede their efforts to get out the vote. I’ve had peace advocates try to tear leaflets out of my hand and ban me from public forums because I was urging people not to vote in an election where the only possible outcome was continued war.

All I have is the answer, Leefeller. I don’t have money, marketing skills, charisma, organizing abilities, or anything else. I noticed a problem, I spent years studying it, and I found an answer. That happens to be the limit of my abilities. I can advocate that people stop voting for a government they cannot hold accountable, but if they don’t happen to want accountability, or if they really believe that they can achieve accountability by continuing to delegate their power to people they cannot hold accountable, there’s nothing I can do to change their minds.

Mark E. Smith,

Everyone not voting so the populist opinion would prevail is worthy of respect in concept.  In reality, responsibility would be forced on the shoulders of the individual, instead of the preferred letting someone else do it. Voting for representatives provides the easy way out for most. Wouldn’t true individualism be hard for many to grasp?

They’ve been preparting, Froggy. They have huge detention camps built to hold millions of people. But soup and bread? Fascist/corporatist regimes aren’t known for feeding inmates very well, as it cuts into profits.

For profit-oriented corporations, cheap labor is better and slave labor is best. With only 5% of the world’s population, we already have 25% of the world’s prisoners, many of whom work for big corporations and only get paid a few dollars a day.

A lot of folks just haven’t really understood what a profit-motivated government means. They’ve watched as every other developed country in the world got health care, they’ve watched as their jobs were outsourced to Mexico, China, India, and Africa, they’ve watched as social programs were cut and trillions of dollars given to the rich, but they don’t seem to understand what they’re seeing.

But the planners have always known and they’ve planned for everything. Not in the way that most Americans prefer, but that’s what happens when people delegate their power to representatives they cannot hold accountable.

I’ve spoken with many progressive Democrats who don’t want to believe that genocide is genocide, that fascism is fascism, and think that a few reforms, if they were the right reforms, would make everything okay. Well, that’s what the New Deal was all about. Regulatory reforms, easily regulated and just as easily deregulated.

Those of us who refuse to vote are not apathetic. It is those who vote to delegate their power to people they cannot hold accountable, who don’t care what happens to them or to anyone else. People who vote in a system that lacks accountability, are knowingly delegating their power to representatives and leaders they cannot hold accountable. THEY’RE the ones who don’t care.

Obama knows that no matter what he does, we cannot impeach him any more than we were able to impeach Bush and Cheney. Only Congress could do that. And we cannot remove a Member of Congress from office—only Congress can do that. They are totally unaccountable and yet people keep voting for them. If the 90% of us who opposed the bailouts and disapprove of what Congress is doing, just stopped voting, the government would have to step down and we could establish a democratic form of government where we could directly hold all elected officials accountable. That’s how it works in countries that have health care. That’s why their governments are afraid of them.

Those who claimed to oppose war, knew Obama was committed to war, and voted for him anyway (or for pro-war McCain, or for a peace candidate with no chance of winning), knew that the only possible outcome of the election was war, but they were so apathetic, they voted anyway.

Those who claimed to oppose the bailouts, knew Obama was committed to bailouts, and voted for him anyway (or for pro-bailout McCain, or for an anti-bailout candidate with no chance of winning), knew that the only possible outcome of the election was bailouts, but they were so apathetic, they voted anyway.

Those who claimed to want single-payer health care, knew Obama was opposed to single-payer, and voted for him anyway (or for his anti-single-payer McCain, or for a pro-single-payer candidate with no chance of winning), knew that the only possible outcome of the election was more profits for the insurance companies, but they were so apathetic, they voted anyway.

They tell those of us who care enough not to vote, that if we don’t vote, we can’t complain. Then they vote for people they cannot hold accountable, and complain and complain and complain. They don’t care about what happens to them or to the country, they only care about their right to complain. They don’t want a voice in government, just the right to vote for somebody they can complain about but cannot hold accountable.

I’m sick and tired of people complaining about what they knew full well they were voting for. Somebody should tell them to STFU.

The problem with health care is the same one we face in the banking system.

A corupt corporate system, that skims profit off the misery of others.

The same corporate outlook, ultimately the same result. The same use of government to legitimize the explotation of people, and prevent legal redress.

The same lack of concern for the public welfare, and the same dehumanization of the American people, whether they be workers or customers.

For example Michelle Obama plants an organic garden at the White House, Big Agri business gets angry, because they want her to use pesticides, and herbicides.

So here we are, at the end of the line, from top to bottom, the system they created, is collapsing. At this point nothing can save it, it’s too late. Even if the Insurance Industry get’s it’s way, it won’t matter, their finished.

I give up on this one..what theyre planiing to do is a modified Medicare Part D—-it is just a huge gift to the insurance industry, so they wil give to Congress’ campaigns…I’d rather just see them leave it alone…

Doctors Himmelstein and Woolhandler from Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP) explain:

“A quarter century of experience with public/private competition in the Medicare program demonstrates that the private plans will not allow a level playing field. Despite strict regulation, private insurers have successfully cherry picked healthier seniors, and have exploited regional health spending differences to their advantage. They have progressively undermined the public plan – which started as single-payer for seniors and now has become a funding mechanism for HMOs – and a place to dump the unprofitably ill. A public plan option doesn’t lead toward single-payer, but toward the segregation of patients, with profitable ones in private plans and unprofitable ones in the public one.”

From Helen Redmond -http://www.counterpunch.org/redmond04232009.html a member of the Chicago Single-Payer Action Network and a Licensed Clinical Social Worker. She works in the emergency room at Cook County Hospital and blogs at http://helenredmond.wordpress.com  She can be reached at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

“..It continues to divide, devalue, and define people by their health status.
It can’t address the endemic racial and gender disparities in the system..
It leaves the employer based system of health care provision intact. That link has to be broken so workers are free to change jobs, go on strike and not fear loss of coverage…
The system would continue to have multiple payers and therefore the complexity and gaps in coverage that are inevitable when there are numerous bureaucracies to navigate….A public plan is not fiscally sustainable because it’s rooted in a multiple payer system that foregoes at least 84% of administrative savings.” (unquote)

I watched the “roundtable” with BaucASS the other day. When Chuck Schumer had the (what little he has) nerve to bring up the idea of a “public option”. BaucASS quickly chastized him with, “We are trying to build a concensus here…everything will be on the table…except single payer. The ‘Merkin people wont do that”..What a fricking stupid thing to say.

Of course, Dems are giving what they promised, except for a few—Kucinich, Conyers et al, on HR 676 , and, Sen Sanders has a publicly funded plan for states. Lets hold out for one of those.

(Sen) Obama told you that he didnt support single payer—why didnt you believe it?

RX, even if 90% of us came out for single-payer health care, the way that 90% of us opposed the bail-outs, nobody in D.C. would pay us any attention.

But I do have a prescription for change.

Stop delegating our power to other people to make our decisions for us. We have no Constitutional way to hold them accountable and they’re not going to hold themselves accountable.

You wouldn’t give your checkbook or your power of attorney to somebody you couldn’t hold accountable, so why give the national treasury and all decision-making power to people you can’t hold accountable?

Stop voting. If nobody votes for them, they will no longer have the consent of the governed. Without the consent of the governed, THEY cannot make our decisions for us, we retain the right to make our own decisions.

We can simply refuse to vote until we get citizen-owned, free, fair, totally transparent, honest elections, where the voters, not the super-delegates choose who the candidates will be.

We can simply refuse to vote until the popular vote is no longer merely symbolic and easily overruled by the political parties, the Electoral College, the winning candidate (by conceding to the loser), or the Supreme Court. In democratic countries the people vote directly for and can directly remove from office ALL representatives, including the President, and the popular vote is the final say and cannot be overruled.

We can refuse to vote until we the people can vote on a Constitution that protects us from the rich instead of protecting the rich from us. A Constitution that guarantees food, clothing, shelter, education, and health care as rights, not privileges, and clearly states that only those with the same responsibilities as other citizens are persons, and those incorporated for the purpose of limiting their liability cannot have the rights of those with full liability.

We can restore the commons to the people so that air, water, the airwaves, etc., cannot be privatized.

We can end the wars. Stop torture. Once we stop delegating our power to people we cannot hold accountable, we can establish a democratic form of government where the supreme power is vested in the people, not in nine unelected justices whose decisions cannot be appealed.

Left, right, center, or apolitical, most of us oppose torture, oppose wars of aggression, oppose the bailouts, and want single-payer health care. There’s an old American tradition called direct democracy, remnants of which still exist in some New England states where citizens can vote directly on budgets and laws instead of having to delegate their power to representatives who cannot be held accountable.

It was an election boycott, not the decades of violence, that finally brought down the Apartheid regime in South Africa. When only 10% of registered voters went to the polls, they were no longer able to claim the consent of the governed and became a laughing stock.

We don’t have to protest them, petition them, lobby them, phone them, email them, or anything else. All we have to do is stop voting for them.

It is that simple. If every time you bang your head against the wall, it hurts, the answer isn’t to try a different wall, or a different angle, the answer is to stop banging your head against the wall.

Before the 2008 election, Congress only had a 10% approval rating. Yet half the people in this country, when presented with only two candidates who had any chance of winning, both Members of that same despised Congress, went out and voted for one of them. We’d darned well better get a national health care plan, because half of us need our heads examined.

Seeing as how Max Baucus is riding shotgun on this deal, we may just as well forget it. He tips over easily to the Republican side when it suits him. We here in America better start thinking about direct action on our behalf. Two million of us on the mall in D.C. demanding single payer h/care might be a way to begin. Follow the French and shut this hologram down for a couple days.

Thank you.  At some point those hypocrites screeching about the “right to life” need to recognize their screed for what it is!  When did “health” become a business and why?  Why is it ok for “stockholders” to make a profit on “your health” or lack thereof?  Why is it that the talk about “socialism” only arises when talking about “government health-care”?  The lies about the “free-market” are on display for the world to see - why don’t more Americans see it when it comes to health-care?

I realize the politicians have been bought & paid for by the lobbyists of the “corporate world”, but enough is enough!  The time has come for these bums to be removed from office!  They have proven to be ineffective as far as the public interest/trust goes!

Well said, Marie.

If not for the insurance companies, babies born in the United States would have as much chance of surviving as babies born in third world countries, and the poorest people in countries like England, France, Germany, and Canada, which have socialized medicine, wouldn’t have longer life expectancies than the wealthiest Americans.

Health “coverage” is not health care. Insurance companies are corporations and as such are required by U.S. business law to deny health care to as many of their covered members as possible, so as to maximize profits to their stockholders. If they approved payment for medical treatment to everyone on their plans who needed it, their stockholders would make less money, the stockholders could sue the insurance company’s board of directors for failing in their fiduciary duty, and the company’s executives could go to jail. Insurance companies have the power to approve or deny medical claims, but they have a legal obligation to deny as many claims as they can. It is often much cheaper for them to deny a claim and then defend themselves in court, be found guilty, and pay damages to the insured’s estate, than to save that person’s life by approving their medical claim and paying their hospital bills.

A lot of people are opposed to socialized medicine because they were taught, “better dead than red.” Well, if they prefer death from preventable or curable illnesses to socialism, it is their right to sacrifice their lives to insurance company profits. Most Americans value their lives more than they value an insurance company executive’s wealth. Only Congress and the White House, which are composed of rich people who favor the rich, stand between us and the national health care plan we deserve.

Marie, you are so right.  I liken the cost to us of the insurance business being in the health care business to the cost to us of the ‘private’ sector being in the war business, i.e. the Blackwater security guard in Iraq makes $1,222/day while the American army sargeant makes $71/day doing the exact same job. 

The only party not getting the shaft in that deal is Blackwater and the only parties not getting the shaft in our present health care non-system are the insurance corporation leeches.

They won’t accept Darwin as a theory for evolution, yet they embrace the concept of ‘Survival of the Fittest’when it comes to social or moral issues.
Apparently if you are unable to afford healthcare, they expect you to tough it out, or just die. Yet if you have the money- you should be granted all possible means to sustain your life- whether you like it or not.Rich and brain dead, you must be kept on lifesupport no matter what. Poor with diabetes, you’re screwed.
As Usual the Repugs blind followers have no concept of what Darwins theory really was, ‘Fit’ did not refer to strength- more aptly ‘Suvival of the most Adaptable’, not the ‘stongest’.But then again if you reject the well documented evidence of Darwins theory- why bother studying it. Just use it when it leads itself to your excuse, to screw thy neighbor.
Oxymoronic Rhetoric palgues the Repugs. Their tax cut/deficit mantra is the most obvious- less tax revenues drives up deficits. The other is the idea that Taxation is ‘generational theft’..So not only do we increase the deficit by reduced revenues, but assure that future generations are unable to earn well paying jobs through a good education. All Tax cuts does is put money in Mom & Dads pocket now, and negate any type of investment in future generations- talk about Generational theft. so mom & dad, those few extra buck may get janie her braces, but will Janie have enough money in the future to afford her daughter’s medication for juvenile diabetes?Because those tax cuts You took, created a short fall in the schools budget- which caused teacher layoff and reduced expenditures on updated Text books. Then it reduced the amount of money available from the Fed & state to offer low cost loans or subsidies- so the Community College she hope to attend no longer offered that degree and she can’t afford the university hiked up tuition.Because you see you spent that Tax cut, to buy her that latest IPhone when she was 15.
Essentially Tax cuts are Generational Theft- they reduce tax revenues which pay towards education, healthcare and income for Our aged parents and impovements of infrastructure..and oh yeah Our National Defense.
so stick that extra $100 in your pocket every week, think nothing of it when you buy your 5th latte and scone at Starbucks, Your daughter, Your mother, Your Country won’t miss it a bit.Be Proud, You deserve it because clearly you are the ‘Fittest’ of them all.