There are fewer available transplants than needed. Steve Jobs, with all of his money, had to shop around and found a liver here in Tennessee. Not everyone can get one. That means hard decisions must be made. With no more information than we have, it is unfair to characterize the UK decision as heartless. There may have been dozens waiting for just a few livers and his health could have been so bad as to put him too low on the list. The story smells of an anecdote selected and modified for the express purpose of supporting the position of the opponents of reform here. Not everyone here gets a transplant - not by a long shot.

Would you rather have an insurance employee without medical training deny you service because he was given a quota or because he wants to impress his boss? That is what happens now, right now.

As I have stated many times, single-payer is the only fiscally viable alternative. With that, there are potential savings unlikely or impossible to implement otherwise. There are tremendous savings possible. I have outlined just a few in another post:
http://www.crawfordharris.com/yes-we-can-save/

As for Obama having become a more or less typical politician, I share your disappointment. It is true, however, that people on the outside cannot fully appreciate the pressures on the few politicians that want to serve with integrity. That is one reason I voluntarily refused to run for re-election way back in the 1970s. It is possible to resist but very difficult.

Maybe you can follow it... :D

http://anything-goes.us/temp/hcp.gif

Michale....

Wow! Yer fast!! :D

Gary Reirbach died a few days ago. He was a 22 year old that was admitted to a UK hospital for a bad liver brought on by excessive and heavy drinking since the age of 13. It's relevant to note that this was his FIRST hospitalization..

The UK government bureaucracy determined that Gary wasn't worth having a new liver so they let him die..

Now, I am a hard-nosed former cop and military officer. I have no time for the Gary Reirbachs of the world who cause their own problems. I know that sounds callous, but it is how I am. I fully understand the decision that lead to Gary's death.

On the other hand....

The argument that this was Gary's first hospitalization and that he MIGHT have been rehabilitated, does have merit.

It is this kind of bureaucracy that makes life and death decisions that I fear from the Democrat's HealthCare plan. Such a plan would have a GOVERNMENT ENTITY deciding who lives and who dies.. And such decisions would be made by a, for all intents and purposes, POLITICAL PARTISAN organization.

Democrats have shown that they are willing to be as nastily partisan as Republicans were when THEY were in charge... So, what's to stop some Dem oriented board to decide that I am not worth a new heart.. Granted, I have served my country in several conflicts and two different branches of the US Armed Forces.. But I have criticized the Obama administration and Democrats in general. So, no new heart or liver for me, eh??

The status quo may be unacceptable... But the plan that Democrats have put forth does NOTHING to fix ANY of the myriad of problems facing health care and not only makes matters worse, but actually is going to cost the average American citizen even MORE...

How can a TRILLION+ program be "revenue neutral"?? It's simply not possible.. It surely won't be "citizen neutral", that much is certain..

I should say that I have a great deal of confidence in the government running healthcare.

Then you must surely see something I don't.. A distinct possibility, to be sure. :D

I see no examples of efficiency within the Obama Administration. Except, of course, for the efficiency of partisanship and political bigotry...

The problems with the stimulus are basically it was too small, Obama let the Regressives and Blue Dogs stuff it with nonsense (only 40% of the package can be called stimulus) and most of the stimulus isn't scheduled to begin for another year. Why? Don't ask me.

One reason...

Politics...

I voted for Obama The Leader...

What I got was Obama The Politician...

Michale.....

I need a few days to come up with a post on addressing the problems claimed by those opposing single-payer.

I am not familiar with Gary Reirbach.

Government management varies depending on several factors. I can address those in the post I am contemplating. To keep you from fretting too much in the meantime, I should say that I have a great deal of confidence in the government running healthcare. The main consideration is to keep the opponents from deliberately fouling it up. To heII with bipartisanship.

The problems with the stimulus are basically it was too small, Obama let the Regressives and Blue Dogs stuff it with nonsense (only 40% of the package can be called stimulus) and most of the stimulus isn't scheduled to begin for another year. Why? Don't ask me.

Without question the status quo is not acceptable. The healthcare industry, through the politicians that they own, could come up with something worse. I still fear that they will. Single-payer gets them almost completely out of the picture, thereby giving us a head start on something rational.

I also voted for Obama, a different one than we are presently seeing.

That was very enlighting.

A couple points.

Maybe I missed it in your outstanding commentary, but what are the drawbacks of a single payer system. What I mean is, what are the issues of those who have a problem with the single payer system..

I noticed that you mentioned the UK.. Do you know the case of Gary Reirbach?

Finally, in your point about Government Management.
I asked the question before but no one had any response. Well, CW did, but it was a misunderstanding.

Is there any instance where the government has entered what is traditionally a private sector enterprise and actually ran it well??

It seems that there is an issue of credibility here. And let's face it. To be perfectly honest, the government is losing credibility by the day in it's efforts towards the economy... I am reminded when President Obama swore up and down that we MUST pass the second stimulus package or else unemployment will rise above 8%..

Well, the second stimulus was passed and unemployment STILL rose to 9.4%...

The government in general and this administration in particular doesn't have a good track record that would allow the politically agnostic person (such as myself) to believe that they (the administration) is truly up to the task..

As I have said on many occasions... Yes, it IS probable that the status quo is completely unacceptable... But the question here is, "is a bad plan better than the status quo"??....

I don't think it is...

Finally, I have to say that I am becoming VERY concerned about Obama's tendencies of late to "shoot from the hip" on issues and coming down TOTALLY and COMPLETELY on the WRONG side of said issues..

First off, it was Obama siding with the likes of Chavez and Castro and castigating the Honduran government and it's change of said government that was completely in keeping with it's own Constitution.. Obama was, and still IS, completely and unequivocally in the wrong on that issue.

Then we have Obama spouting off the cuff about Professor Gates and saying that Cambridge cops "acted stupidly"... We come to find out that it was Gates who was the asshole and the Sgt that arrested Gates was a model cop. Hell, that police Sgt even taught about the evils of racial profiling at the Police Academy, for Chreest's sake!

I am saying this as a person who voted for Obama. He really needs to keep his mouth shut until he has all the facts...

Michale.....

I have a post on my blog from a couple of weeks ago that, I hope, fully explains the differences between a public option and single payer.

http://www.crawfordharris.com/yes-virginia-there-is-a-difference/

Why is single-payer such a good thing? For one it eliminates our need to rely on those who created our present mess. It saves about 30 cents on every healthcare dollar just on administrative costs. Government employees don't have to worry about showing a profit so they will have no reason to deny you just to meet a quota or look good. It's the only fiscally viable way to cover everyone.

With a single payer it is easy to direct efforts at prevention, the single greatest potential savings of money and the largest factor in moving us up from 37th in the world in overall health and 50th in life expectancy.

This latest public press conference of Obama's is the exact same number that President Bush had.

In his ENTIRE 8 years of being president. :D

Now, would someone please explain to me exactly what the "Single Payer" plan is and why it is such a good thing??

Thanx.. :D

Michale.....

"Obama could score enormous political points by saying something along the lines of: "Some Democrats in Congress have taken an awful lot of money from the healthcare industry, and they need to make a decision — vote with the special interests which funded your past campaigns, or vote for your constituents' needs." He could even back this up (which would also do wonders for him politically) by saying loudly: "Any Democrat who loses campaign donations as a result of voting for their constituents' interests over big donors' interests, I will personally raise money for and campaign for in your next election." This shows both the carrot and the stick at the same time."

I was really disappointed that President Obama didn't say something like that - that would have made headlines and had all the talking heads talking for sometime after the headlines. I think that really would have resonated. But, that's just me.

"I do communicate with Chris, probably more frequently than he wishes."

This is patent nonsense. I love communicating with my readers, and read every single email sent to me. I sometimes don't reply to every one, but I certainly take the time to read them all, as I do with comments. So even though I know you were joking, nutcase, I just wanted to say to everyone: "Email is fine with me! Bring it on!"

:-)

As for Obama's performance tonight, I would give it about a seven out of ten. Some answers were about an 8 or 9, some were about a 5 or 6, so for me it averaged out to 7. He hit some personal stories, he remained positive and upbeat throughout most of the hour, and he made a lot of good points and cut some arguments off at the knees. There were a few shaky moments, but all around I was pleased with his performance. In case anyone was wondering...

-CW

Chris,

Obama's quest for bipartisanship is on a par with chasing rainbows. Whatever he agrees to, the Regressives will move the goalposts. It wastes not just his time, effort and resources it exacts a steep price in each of those factors. He cannot succeed. It will weaken his image and effectiveness.

I also wonder why progressives are not included in his vision of bipartisanship.

He has had a few PR "successes." The AHA agreed to take a $150 billion cut. The AHIP agreed to reduce healthcare inflation by 1.5%. al-PhARMA agreed to take a $80 billion hit. This gave each of these groups a chance to be seen as signing on to his reform. He gets to appear to be getting the enemy to change sides. It was all pure BS.

With almost universal coverage the members of AHA will receive payments for large numbers of patients that have been charity cases. Actually, the government has been largely subsidizing these costs through both direct payments and letting them write it off on their taxes. It's just a matter of them getting the money out of another pocket.

I feel confident that the AHIP's promise is nothing more than that. Even so, the proposed reforms give them more customers. They will actually make more money, even if they were to keep their promises.

To get PhARMA to agree, he reversed himself on eliminating the Part D ban on allowing Medicare to negotiate prices. Most of that $80 billion falls into the donut hole. They have agreed to let seniors purchase brand names at 50% while in the donut hole. They expect to take business away from the generics and still make obscene profits, even with that limited 50% discount.

As bad as the economy is, Eli Lilly just announced a 21% increase in profits for the last quarter. Poor things. Don't you feel sorry for them?

I want everyone to appreciate one little fact. None of the proposed public option plans that I have seen give everyone an option. If you presently have a plan through your employer, you are not eligible for the public option. Every health insurance company will likely end up with more customers than now.

Pay attention. These plans are scheduled to begin in 2013. How many people will die or lose coverage during that 4 years? How much will costs increase during that span? It makes one wonder why they need to act before the August recess.

It is a scam. Obama is giving away the farm. He seems to have no interest in being a leader of the progressives. Although I am on Medicare and have no dog in the main fight, I am disappointed and disheartened by what is happening both on Capitol Hill (perhaps that should be CapitAl Hill) and in the Oval Office.