The proposal became an integral part of F.D.R.’s 1935 Social Security Act. But as it ground its way through Congress, F.D.R. waffled in the face of opposition from right wing Southern Democrats (antediluvian “Blue Dogs”) and the A.M.A. (it was around this time that the A.M.A.’s infamous president, Dr. Morris Fishbein, coined the stupifying label “Socialized medicine”). By the time these arch-reactionary forces were done whittling away at the legislation, and without the promised support of F.D.R., Perkins’ long-sought Medicare-For-All proposal had been stripped away.

Nearly 75 years have passed since F.D.R.’s original opportunity to enact a form of single payer, the only rational policy to protect the right of all Americans to first-quality, affordable health care, was lost. Meantime, every other industrialized nation in the world has enacted some form of single-payer health care for its citizens. No other nation’s citizenry remotely would consider trading their prevailing single-payer coverage for our chaotic, insane, profit-driven non-system, which astoundingly is the most expensive in the world while simultaneously leaving 50 million Americans uninsured (not to mention the tens of millions more who are underinsured). In fact, citizens of nations with single payer coverage think Americans are crazy, stupid, or both to allow the private health insurance industry — and thus, the unceasing demands for ever-increasing profits by the industry’s shareholders — to determine if we receive care. In their eyes, the status quo is criminal.

In 1935, F.D.R. thought the problem was solved. In 1993, the Clintons thought the problem would go away if they tinkered around the edges of the for-profit insurance system. Now, in 2009, the Baucuses and Jim Roosevelts act as if they can solve the crisis by issuing “off the table” edicts. They are wrong. No matter how much they dislike it, this issue is going to keep reappearing until our government finall does the correct thing.

So yes, by all means, let’s try the road not taken to a rational, not-for-profit, Medicare For All, everybody in–nobody out, SINGLE PAYER health care system.

——————————

<Health Care Reform By Medicare Expansion</strong

by Eric W. Fonkalsrud, M.D., and Michael D. Intriligator, Ph.D.

Yes, let’s try what the majority of nurses and doctors say they want: Improved Medicare-for-All.

Yes, let’s try what the majority of serious health policy experts and economists say would work best: Improved Medicare-for-All.

If the political process requires us to get there in major steps rather than one big leap, then let’s begin with nothing less than a Medicare-like Public Insurance Option with no restrictions on participation in this year’s health reform bill. This is clearly and unequivocally what the public–the VOTERS–want, as evidenced below.

“72% support a government-administered public plan, according to a recent New York Times/CBS News poll.
Additionally, the Employee Benefits Research Institute – a group funded by the likes of JPMorganChase, Wal-Mart, General Dynamics, Morgan Stanley, Blue Cross Blue Shield, CIGNA, and United Health – found 83% in support of the public plan option.”

source: http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2009062730/no-compromise-public-plan-why-weakening-public-plan-option-would-imperil-not-j

P.S. Dolores, you might want to direct your good friend Jim Roosevelt, CEO of Tufts HMO, to the recent HHS Report that details the deep flaws and failures of our state’s market-based approach to health care reform. Seems like Jim is very selective in what he chooses to say about the “Mass. Plan”. Not surprising.

excerpts from recent report released by HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebalius:

From MA State House News Service daily update Friday June 26, 2009:

“U.S.: MASS. FAMILIES AND BUSINESSES
‘DESERVE BETTER’ HEALTH CARE

*A federal government report on the quality of health care in the states concluded that “Massachusettsans can’t afford the status quo.”

Although state leaders have often described Massachusetts’s health care access laws as a potential model for a national health reform plan, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services report found a number of flaws.

According to the report, a one-pager compiled from sources that range from CMS to the Center for American Progress to the CDC – in some cases from years-old studies – “Families and businesses in Massachusetts deserve better.”

*The report cites rising premiums – a 94 percent spike for families since 2000 – and a shortage of insurance options for Massachusetts residents.

*In addition, the report cites a shortage of preventive care. “Preventative measures that could keep Massachusettsans healthier and out of the hospital have improved with reform measures but remain underutilized,” according to the document.

“The need for reform in Massachusetts and across the country is clear. *Despite increased access to coverage and medical care, Massachusetts needs national reform *to help control costs and promote quality,” the report concludes.

“Massachusetts families simply can’t afford the status quo and deserve better.”

The reports, endorsed by U.S. HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, were released Friday afternoon”

—

Now is the time to move boldly toward enacting what the majority of Americans are saying they want: Improved Medicare-for-All (aka Single Payer).

TAKE ACTION: We BayStaters have got to deluge Senators John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, and our Congressperson’s staff with calls (866-338-1015 Capitol Hill Switchboard) telling them that their constituents feel STRONGLY that a Medicare-like Public Insurance option is a non-negotiable “Line in the Sand” and that any bogus “trigger” is NOT ACCEPTABLE.