In a democracy, we elect our government. Our government, then, represents US. We The People of the United States of America. A government alternative to our profit-driven healthcare system would then represent our wishes to a) not have preconditions that deny care to protect the record profit margins of healthcare providers, b) have a system that focuses on each individual’s health, c) prevents emergency room visits as a consequence of a focus on preventative care.

I think the polls reflect what they do because people have become so polarized, screaming about a “public option” that they don’t even know what that means. And the government has not fought for and represented its people in so long that we no longer believe it possible for them to carry out our wishes. It used to do so, when we had the funding, and that funding came from those who could afford to give it.

Indulge me, please, and listen to what I have to say. I will sincerely listen to all replies in honest disagreement.

In 1952, we had a 92% tax on anything people made over $300,000 (roughly $2,662,962 in today’s terms). We had a booming economy and a wealthy class willing to share the burden of making America great for our citizens and our children. The 92% on the super-wealthy went to pay for programs like social security, education (secondary and post-secondary), Medicaid (for our elderly without huge pocketbooks), and the like.

It was a society in which the majority of Republicans and Democrats recognized the need to, or the value of, sharing the benefits of our great nation’s even greater wealth. It was a society that had a flourishing private sector economy, with business booming. A society in which an average worker could send their child to school, to have a pension not tied to a temperamental stock exchange.

The majority of our popular media is owned by a few corporate conglomerates. That is indisputable–no spin. Much of the advertising money that pays the media channels’ budgets comes from the private sector (Cialis, pfeizer, etc). That is their bread and butter. My spin: the media has a major monetary influence not to reform our healthcare system to offer a reasonably-priced healthcare for our citizens because they are being paid major money by people who are making record profits off denying care, offering shoddy coverage, and increasing the price of healthcare exponentially even when market conditions do not warrant it.

Our free enterprise in this sector has led to a market that is free of consequences for corporations. A market free of any influence by the consumers that receive their coverage–a great way to inflict consequences would be through a democratization of the health care industry; either by offering a cheaper government alternative (i.e. the contentious term “public option”) or by tying their hands when it comes to preconditions (a short way of saying, “We’ll take your money but don’t want to offer you our promised service.”)

When it comes to the customer is always right, or consumer choice, our choices are a sorry bunch when it comes to health care. The primary reason for this being our ravenous health providers.

“It is well known that other 1st world nations have higher health statistics than we do when it comes to mortality rates, and consumer satisfaction, and they get this at a fraction of the cost.” –John Kitzhaber, 2-time Oregon Governor, 19-year Emergency Room Doctor.

U.S. health providing corporations, incidentally, also have the highest profit margin of any other 1st world nation. 30-40% of their total expenditures go to “administrative costs” and the majority of this money goes to individuals whose job it is to find ways to deny the health care they have promised to provide.

My aunts and cousins have had to be on the Oregon Health Plan for a year or two at some point. The Oregon Health Plan is a form of healthcare provided by the state government for those that cannot afford health care (i.e. it’s socialized medicine, just like medicare, but for poor rather than old people). It saved my aunt’s life. Not only did it save her life, but it offers fantastic health benefits, and does so at a fraction of the per-person cost that for-profit health corporations (or “providers) do.

Perhaps that’s because we had an M.D. as governor who knew that none of the 9,000 billing codes for doctors had to do with “health improvement” or “cure” or per-capita lower mortalities for a hospital that educates patients about their conditions, and has worked to change it.

OHP is now largely unavailable due to a shift in priorities, but demand is coming back. Our little laboratory for democracy here in the wild west is concocting new and cheap ways to offer socialized health care. A healthcare system focused on health, not on profits.

I’m getting preachy, but I’ve tried to at least be sincere. Thank you for hearing me out.

Regards,
–Stevo

The high satisfaction is with their healthcare. This is similar to the kind of reaction you get when you ask (in general) about Congressional representation… “yes, we need to vote them all out - except for MY representative!”

I firmly believe that most who have employer-subsidized or -provided healthcare are just fine with the quality, but they don’t like the cost. Heck, I don’t like the cost of mine. I paid NOTHING out of my paycheck for health insurance 20 years ago. But I also took a big pay cut when I took the job, so I could get that employer-paid health care. Suffice it to say, that ain’t the way it is now. I got a small raise this year, and just about all of it got eaten by the increase in my premium. I don’t like the cost myself. But I guarantee you that Obamacare won’t help it one iota.

I think most of Americans agree on one thing: our health care system does need to be reformed badly.

People might agree that it can be improved, but I strongly doubt that most Americans believe it needs badly to be reformed. That’s a widely quoted Dem talking point, but where are the polls to provide some support for it? Too many Republicans and conservatives are too quick to fall into the, “Yes we agree that it’s a big mess” trap. As soon as we say that, the solutions we advocate seem woefully inadequate, with this kind of result.

And we certainly don’t believe that it needs to be done badly, which is what Obama is trying to do.

…to be the Holy Grail of their assumption of political power. Lenin, for one, called it the bedrock of the socialist state.

So those who correctly identify the clamor for socialized medicine with a fascist or statist worldview, and speak boldly on the subject, show a much greater understanding than you do. For you to state that “it is not a question on freedom” shows a profound ignorance of what state-run health care does to an individual’s ability to make life choices.

As for your final paragraph, I doubt you even have a clue what “social freedom” even is. You probably think abortion and homosexuality are the only measures of that. I’d love to hear your definition of what a “fairytale view of economic freedom” might be, though I imagine that would involve a good deal more ignorance being put forth.

I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make here, but if you’re trying to argue that this “debate” hasn’t pronounced a significant, pronounced shift in public opinion, you’re already off to a bad start…

And looks like TPTB already got to you.
Toodles, pal!

Bye, dipwad.

What changed in 2007, the start of the decline for the question, was that Democrats regained control Congress, and that Democratic leadership is the most liberal ever, just take a look at the committee chairmen in the house. Many Americans would consider this to be a profound shift; I do. The more health care reform is talked about, support for the federal government’s role in that reform has declined.

While there are factors other than Democrats gaining control of congress and the white house, such as the recession and record deficit spending, it is Democrats pressing the issue of health care reform under such conditions that has weakened support in classic Democrat overreach form. I think the real clincher here, i.e. that which tips the overall response from yes to no, is the government requiring all Americans to have health care coverage and imposing taxes on those who do not comply. Americans want better , cheaper health care, not bigger, more intrusive and expensive government.

Middle American has caught on the word “responsibility” really means “require”. Thus the question is transformed from,
Do you think it is the responsibility of the federal government to make sure all Americans have healthcare coverage?
to,
Do you think it is the federal government should require all Americans to have healthcare coverage?

What do you mean it’s not a question of freedom?

How many framers of the constitution made a clarion call that mandated the population to buy health care?

How is it freedom when you can be jailed for not buying health care? I would think that jail time is the antithesis of freedom.

Social freedom? I’m all for social freedom but that requires LESS government, not more. Then again, I don’t need a sugar tit either.

You could argue numbers all day long and I’d probably be at a loss to say anything about it..but when you troll by foisting the idea that the healthcare reform bill is freedom I have to say you’re nuts!!

That was the thinking behind this diary from a number of months ago:

http://www.redstate.com/bs/2009/04/13/on-restricting-the-franchise/

…to Senators Lincoln and Pryor letting them know I sent the above letters. Not that it will do much good but I won’t rest until they vote No or pay for a Yes vote on Obamacare.

parties have invested too much to let anyone else play. NY-23 was a great example of the lengths they will go to in order to keep their exclusive membership. They find ways to set the rules and the third parties are left with dreams of what might have been.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………….

When you can’t make them see the light, make them feel the heat.
-Ronald Reagan
…………………………………….
It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority
keen to set brush fires in people’s minds.
-Samuel Adams

or your tenure here will be quite brief. This is a conservative AND GOP blog. We do not support 3rd party efforts and have very low tolerance for posters who do.

the House vote.

Since they’re the only ones using a LV model, they’re the only ones IMO who know s**t from shinola. The rest are irrelevant as far as I’m concerned (”Adult” polling models? People who don’t care enough about their country to even bother to register to vote? Who *cares* what they think)

Or is that something that can’t be written becuase it is too colorful?