President Obama is right -- the only way we are going to have real health care reform in the United States is by providing a public plan.
But right now, special interests in Washington, D.C. are doing everything they can to stop public health care from materializing. They say it is too expensive, will limit choice and diminish the quality of care.
This is simply not true and we need to fight back.
In San Francisco, we are proving the special interests wrong.
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Two years, after we launched the United States' first universal health care program, Healthy San Francisco, almost 70% of previously uninsured San Franciscans are now enrolled in our public program.
Our experience in San Francisco is proving what most Americans already know -- it is much less expensive to keep people well than it is to treat their sickness. This is particularly true when much of the treatment for uninsured Americans is provided in costly emergency rooms. We are providing health care at a cheaper rate than similar private care options and we are doing this in the middle of one of the worst recessions in history.
The president is making the case for a public plan across the country. But he needs your help if we are going to defeat the special interests and get Congress to act in our best interests.
As the chair of U.S. Conference of Mayors Health Care Reform Task Force, I am working with both Republican and Democratic mayors to make the case for the president's plan to reform the health care system.
As Congress gets closer to taking action on national health care reform we need to make our voices heard. The stakes are too high. The health of our nation and its economic recovery depend on it. We need a public option.
Sign our petition and show your support for President Obama's plan to reform the health care system.
Listen to Mayor Newsom's Green 960 radio show online or subscribe to his weekly policy discussions on iTunes. Join Mayor Newsom on Facebook. You can also follow him on Twitter.
Follow Gavin Newsom on Twitter: www.twitter.com/GavinNewsom
"too expensive"??? LMAO! Public health care as/more expensive than private, would mean that our government would be taking/making enough PROFIT to pay off our national debt AND our loan from China for our "spread of democracy" in Bush/Cheney's war of choice.
But ANYBODY WITH HALF A BRAIN knows that our government WON'T be saying to our sick & suffering citizens what the "healthcare" insurance companies are saying: "Your money or your life"!
Polls cited do not exemplify the questions asked and overall, they are well done but negatively biased, IMO.
I appreciate you posting them, and can only say that as an uninsured American, I would LOVE to only wait 6 hours for care in the ER and not be charged $200 copay - or $1500 as a self-payer for care. I've worked at prestigeous health organizations, know medical professionals well, and the more I learn, the more I believe we MUST revamp an overpriced, ineffective health care system, and do it now.
please note no one is touching the money for our industrial military complex and corp profits from these unwinable wars.
unwinnable wars are a gold mine for corp profits.
this industrial military complex has been able to keep americans fearful of someone any country since the end of world war II
complete genius on their part.$$$$$$$$$$
mention nukes or terrorists or evil empires and americans open up their pocket books big time.
they will even raise their children to fight in these illegal wars and call them heroes for doing so.
President Obama suggested at a town hall event Wednesday night that one way to shave medical costs is to stop expensive and ultimately futile procedures performed on people who are about to die and don't stand to gain from the extra care.
In a nationally televised event at the White House, Obama said families need better information so they don't unthinkingly approve "additional tests or additional drugs that the evidence shows is not necessarily going to improve care."
He added: "Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller."
Sounds like a good idea, could save health care costs and reduce the social security liability
President Obama reported 46,000,000 uninsured Americans. By implementing SF's solution, presumably our cost would be:
$
219,047,600,000 per year or $2.2 trillion over ten years.
Is this what American's are looking for?
http://www.pnhp.org/facts/singlepayer_faq.php#raise_taxes
Currently, about 60% of our health care system is financed by public money: federal and state taxes, property taxes and tax subsidies. These funds pay for Medicare, Medicaid, the VA, coverage for public employees (including police and teachers), elected officials, military personnel, etc. There are also hefty tax subsidies to employers to help pay for their employees’ health insurance. About 20% of health care is financed by all of us individually through out-of-pocket payments, such as co-pays, deductibles, the uninsured paying directly for care, people paying privately for premiums, etc. Private employers only pay 21% of health care costs.
A universal public system would be financed in the following way: The public funds already funneled to Medicare and Medicaid would be retained. The difference, or the gap between current public funding and what we would need for a universal health care system, would be financed by a payroll tax on employers (about 7%) and an income tax on individuals (about 2%). The payroll tax would replace all other employer expenses for employees’ health care, which would be eliminated. The income tax would take the place of all current insurance premiums, co-pays, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket payments. For the vast majority of people, a 2% income tax is less than what they now pay for insurance premiums and out-of-pocket payments such as co-pays and deductibles.
Probably a lot more. (average mortgage you probably pay more than that per month) Sounds like the RWNM at work.
thanks for coming here but you're preaching to the choir...get all San Franciscans to deluge Sen.Feinstein's office cuz she's one of the nay-sayers with Insurance Lobby $$$$ lining her pockets.
I agree Mayors, Governors and citizens who see and live the impact of the health crisis in this country
every day have got to unify, come together in a show of force and take this gov't back.
Mayor Newsom
that's why we need a Public Option so insurance companies can't tell us what we CAN'T HAVE.
In testimony before the committee, The former VP of public relations for the healthcare giant Cigna, stated that insurers go to great lengths to avoid responsibility for sick people, use deliberately incomprehensible documents to mislead consumers about their benefits, and sell "junk" policies that fail to cover needed care.
And why should this come as a surprise?
For profit:
Higher premiums, less service, more profit.
So what's not to get?
The ONLY question here is whether or not health care is a public RIGHT,
and if our elected representatives will locate some sense of duty amongst their political ambitions
and finally do what is best for the American People
Health Care for profit only enriches the companies and their CEO's, it does nothing for Americans!
CEO Aetna Ron Williams - $24,300, CIGNA Ed Hanway$12,2336, Wellpoint Angela Braly $9,844 etc.
We know that Medicare has administrative costs far lower than any private Health Insurance Plan; really we should be doing Medicare for every citizen.
72% OF AMERICANS WANT A PUBLIC OPTION - so why can we not get this from our Representives!!!
The Health Insurance Companies and their guardians in the Congress and Senate cannot be allowed to to win this one!!! SEND YOUR LETTERS, EMAILS AND FAXES!!!!!! FIGHT BACK NOW!!!!!
Based on the 2007 study in Rome Italy - 5-year survival rates in Europe are 47.3% and 55.8% for men and women versus 66.3% and 62.9% - The real shocker is prostate cancer - 25% die in Europe versus less than 1% in the US
I would argue that the stats on life expectancy have a lot more to do with the US lifestyle than our health care system.
We do have marginally better results when it comes to many cancers than in some european countries but that is because at one the late 80s or early 90s cancer became the big yellow-journalism scare and everyone had it programmed into their head that they must check for lumps everytime they shower or get a prostate exam even if it 'looks gay'. So on that front, the medias focus on the issue of cancer has prevention on that front as ingrained in our national psyche.
I am overweight and have been struggling with it my whole life. I've done everything from the gym to running 3 miles a day, to counting calorie intake in half, and, until maybe 4 months ago, had very minimal success. Now I am shrinking rather rapidly, but everytime I've gone to a doctor since age 12 and asked for help with loosing weight: a doctor prescribed diet, workout regime, etc. I was told it was fine and not to worry about it. In other countries, I would have gotten all the help i requested to help prevent future long-term health risk.
So some of it is health care, and a lack fo incentive to engage in preventative care.
As for economic impact, I can tell you that when my daughter's finger was severed in the car door (yes, kids - the door CAN actually cut off your finger) she needed 2 micro-surgeries from a plastic surgeon, physiotherapy to re-establish use AND follow up visits. I cringe to think of what it would cost if we lived 2 hrs to the south. Our cost? $7.00 Yes - s-e-v-e-n dollars. That was for parking at the hospital.
If we were going to be held hostage to the tune of whatever it would cost a U.S. citizen, we would have been in debt forever. How does that equate to making good fiscal sense? Antecdotal, yes, but worth considering.
Jeni
http://highlyirritable.wordpress.com
Also, were there other costs that you're paying that you're not aware of? For example, what pay decrease do you have because your employer is also taxed?
It's great to hear stories of doctors doing amazing things. I'm happy for your family.
Taxes are meant for health care, and not for going to fake wars. Didn't you know that already?
In Massachusetts, CommonwealthChoice allegedly has 90+% coverage. It has incurred heavy losses, as many covered by the plan cannot afford premiums. The cost is covered by the State. This is stupid. WE NEED UNIVERSAL COVERAGE not some half assed plan that only covers the poor.
Under Clinton, an attempt was made to have SOME sort of universal coverage. Doctors, and ESPECIALLY Insurance companies spent about $125,000,000 to defeat it, citing "government bureaucracies" will come between you and your Doctor., which is total cr*p. Expect them to really dig in now and maybe pay $1,000,000,000 to defeat it.
I would love to see big shot Insurance CEO's have a personal medical crisis that would be denied by the same Doctors they employ to deny claims and enhance profits (as if). Perhaps at that point they might decide their life is more important than their job, and promote UNIVERSAL health care.
Despite the lies and propaganda, countries like Canada, France and the UK all have fully functioning health programs that cover their population well.
That is what we need. I say nationalize the health care system. Since our Congress essentially has great, free health care, We the People deserve the same. NOW!
If you think that government run health care is going to be expensive, think about the fact that your current coverage will rival the monthly cost of your rent or mortgage (for many, it already has).
At some point only very large corporations will be able to afford to subsidize health insurance for its employees. That will cripple the discretionary income of middle class families and break the backs of small businesses.
Rationing already exists. It is the business model of the insurance companies.
I think the solution lies with developing an individual pool. And insurance should cover catastrophic medical bills not a routine visit to your GP. This is akin to having oil changes covered by your auto ins. A visit to your GP costs $75-$100/pop. If not for insurance covering this (and raising demand) the cost would be far less and affordable to all but the most destitute.
The only government control I would advocate for this would be rules that would require insurance companies to allow everyone to purchase ins....it would be real simple.....must accept everyone regardless of current medical condition. This would raise the costs for all but under a catastrophic policy model the cost would still be far lower than what we pay now.
Don't we end up with a system that is similar. No preventative care because you can pay your cell phone bill with a single visit.
Is there a connection between rare brain diseases and eating certain foods? Or is CJD genetic?
http://www.examiner.com/x-7160-Sacramento-Nutrition-Examiner~y2009m6d24-Is-there-a-connection-between-rare-brain-diseases-and-eating-certain-foods?