Its time to adopt the same high standard and efficient healthcare insurance system as all the other industrialized countries of the world.  It is unheard of in Sweden or UK or France for a person to go bankrupt from paying medical bills. It is also unheard of to deny a person healtcare because of inability to pay or "high risk" from previous conditions.  We need to become a more civilized country.  We need to recognize that a person's right to health is greater than insurance and pharma companies' "right to profit."
Taking the private insurance middle-man out of the equation will simplify the process and reduce massive amounts of paper work- these savings will go towards paying for the cost of healthcare instead of denying people healthcare.  There's no reason we can't do it.  UK spends less on health care than the US, and yet covers everyone, and with good quality care and free choice of doctors.  I can vouch for that because I'm studying abroad in the UK and have had a chance to talk with people and experience the NHS first-hand.  There's no reason we can't do it- its time we stopped listening to the ridiculous excuses put up by industry-backed politicians!

   Regardless of where we end up going as to "reform" of Health Care, one thing we COULD do even if we do nothing else, would be to set things up so our Government negotiated prescription drug prices for us all and set them nationwide.

   Canada does this without issues.

   This would serve to take a big, and to me obvious, chunk out of the cost of care, providing some relief for the 50% of Americans that take daily medications, and all the others that need some occasionally, just as soon as it was done. It is potentially fast, clean, and simple to do.

   But it is not even being mentioned. Is that just another congressional "oversight"? NO.

   The PHARMS are spending a lot of money to make sure this does not come up; and as usual our so called representatives are acting the part of good little bought and paid for foot soldiers for the PHARMS. People should be up in arms about this matter at the very least if not also screaming for SINGLE PAYER.

   Canada does this simple thing which is why a lot of folks go there for their Meds.

   The PHARMS are using bait and switch tactics again, to present as a viable option amendments to the reform package that would allow importation of Meds from other countrys. McCain tried to get this in in Dodds commitee yesterday, though it was voted down, due to saftey concerns as to fake drugs etc. The reason this is a placebo law is that if enacted, only a very few people will take advantage of the legal ability to get foriegn drugs at much cheaper prices for various reasons, including saftey issues which can be very real. The PHARMS know they can continue to manage matters and generally keep prices falsly high and very profitable while holding up this red herring to keep real change at bay.

   Consider: what would solve the prescription drug price issue, and all the safety issues at the same time, and do so regardless of any other reforms or non-reforms that are made? Simply put, only Government negotiated, national price setting can do this. It could do it quickly and painlessly too. Even the insurance companies would benifit as they pay the difference when they provide covarage for Meds. Though they would probably attempt to keep the profits and continue to charge too much for co-pays for prescriptions, we all could make that one hell of an issue very quickly. But I would prefer to see the law written so that in this one arena the insurance companies had to opperate on a non profit basis, disallowing markups and over large administrative costs to be charged to the insured. It would go a long way to helping to close the so called donut hole in medicare too. Something we need to do very urgently as many are being forced into bankruptcy and so on due to that evil, legal, loop hole, that was designed to protect the profits of the PHARMS and is doing so very nicely.

   The elegance of enacting a law like this satisfies every aspect of the situation as to prescription prices. It would still allow free enterprise and competition on all other levels, just resetting the so called "even playing field" factor in this one regard while allowing the greedy bastards to continue on with the rape of the American Patient in all other matters. That is if we don't get any other REAL REFORMS. Doing this works no matter what other reforms we enact. Even if we do nothing else we can do this one thing. It could even be a seperate bill.

   The only logical reason to resist this concept is the PHARMS profits will certainly be affected. That is not to say they would not make ANY profit, just a lot less of one. Thus we see the intense lobbying efforts and payola working against it.

Folks, Please, Please, RAISE YOUR VOICES.

Fight for SINGLE PAYER and NEGOTIATED PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES.

I don't know what the rules are, and I don't want to play the game.

All I want is for all my love to go 'round again.

Opponents
of a public option for health-care coverage should stop deluding
themselves into believing private health insurance companies don't
already ration health care when they deny coverage to applicants with
pre-existing conditions or disallow a claim submitted by a client for a
life-preserving procedure.

Insurance companies are only concerned with their respective
bottom-lines, not health-care delivery, and fear competition from a
public option having health-care delivery as its sole objective.

Facing competition from a public option might compel private health
insurance companies to reduce executive compensation, trim
bureaucracies and paperwork, simplify policy language and eliminate
exclusions and reduce client premiums.

If private health insurers really believed they had superior products
to what the government might offer, they would demand market
competition to prove it.

Health Care Solved!  Are You Poor?  Sorry.

I spoke to a rep in Congressman Waxman's office and asked if it were true that the Congressman was holding up a vote in committee out of fear that Weiner's amendment to include a single-payer option would pass. The assistant said only that hearings were being held, probably into next week, to arrive at a "consensus" in the committee. He would not say if Waxman would support single-payer, but asked if I had a comment. I told him I strongly urged Congressman Waxman (who is my congressman) to support a government-run single payer option.

I called Jane Harmon's local LA office because I could not get through on the Capitol Hill line.  The phone person was kind of unresponsive and then asked if I would forward the Democrats.com email with the "leaning" dems list.  I complied but now I sort of wonder if they will use that to target the Dems on the lists to sway their vote back toward "no".  Harmon has been a big blue dog and we need to get her out.  Fortunately we are supporting a progressive Marcie Winograd who will run against her for the second time in 2010.  Marcie got 33% of the vote in the last primary against Harmon after a short campaign... she will do better this time with more time and money.

 Should I not have sent the email to Harmon's clerk...? oh well...

I called 4 of the 6 Dems who are Leaning toward hr 676. Peter Welch and Diana DeGette voicemails were full.

Staffters very nice and said would pass my comments along.

 At a recent City Council mtg in my town it was said that  a particular local council woman takes notice when she receives 12 calls on an issue.  Politicians like the rest of us have their preferences of communication.  I like the number 12.  If we can each get 12 people to communicate on an issue, well that's do-able.  Let's each get 12 people we know to communicate to our politicians on  Single Payer HR 676.  We can make it happen!