Republican County Commissioner advocates single payer

[eridani]

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/07/01/3683661/as-i-see-it-the-remedy-is-medicare.html

(Jack Bernard is a retired health care executive who formerly worked with Kansas hospitals on planning and cost containment issues. He is now a Republican county commissioner in Monticello, Ga., a suburb of Atlanta.)

Plus, this administration squandered the chance for real reform, a simple expansion of Medicare. The "government takeover" catch phrase scared them off.

Universal Medicare is a concept that makes sense technically and fiscally. The U.S. currently has per capita health expenditure costs double that of other developed nations on single-payer systems.

Medicare For All can be paid for through payroll and employer taxes, just like Medicare and Social Security are now. It is affordable because private insurance marketing and administrative costs (30 percent of the premium) are eliminated for employees and the firms employing them. Costs can be controlled through the Independent Payment Advisory Board, an independent panel set up under Obamacare. And, just like those programs, it would find immediate acceptance by the American public after implementation.

For more information on costs and benefits, please go to the web site of Physicians for a National Health Program at www.pnhp.org/.

Comment by Don McCanne of PNHP: This op-ed is of special significance for us for two reasons: 1) Medicare for All is not only a liberal/progressive issue as these are the words of a Republican health care executive, and 2) The efforts of PNHP to communicate the single payer message are gaining traction as he cites us as an authoritative source.

Jack Bernard is to be commended for his persistent efforts to inform the public on a better health care alternative. We need to renew and expand our important work on behalf of health care justice for all. It's working.

My comment: Intermittently, a website for Republicans for Single Payer appears. Lots of hits today, but I can't find the website that was up a couple of years ago.

[dkf]

1. I wouldn't be against the ACA so firmly if private insurance did a good job of

Being efficient and cost effective but they aren't as evidenced by the costs we pay compared to most other countries.

We are wasting so much money and now we are being forced to do so.

[Scootaloo]

3. There is no way for private insurance to be more efficient than universal

The train of thought, "government is inefficient" is often taken as some sort of universal truth. Certain someones have worked hard for a long time to instill this. The truth is that it's a matter of scale. Essentially it boils down to small things are best handled by small groups, big things by big groups.

The major reason is that at somewhere on the scale, you figure in profit motive. At the smaller end of the scale, the search for profit can be a genuine motivator for real efficiency and innovation. At the larger end, however, profit-seeking becomes a destructive factor, resulting in gouged prices, reduced service, and abuse of workers.

When we look at things that are on a national scale - say, health coverage for a 311 million people - you're going to want a large, centralized solution without any profit motive. The best method for delivering that is, logically, the government of that nation.

[eridani]

4. I think it's more about whether something is a public good or not

--rather than about scale. How about this agreement? The government doesn't make shoes, and for profit businesses don't get to decide who does or who does not deserve health care?

[TexasTowelie]

2. Oh my!

He is a god-damn socialist!

Guess who won't be let into the club house at the retirement village.