America Needs Health Care

Now.

I just finished reading 'The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health Care' by T.R. Reid.

Phenomenal book.

I know now what I knew before: America needs a proper healthcare plan which is government subsidized through some clever use of existing taxes, or some kind of mandate (like auto-insurance) so everyone can be covered and so nobody is refused due to a pre-existing condition or dropped because they made a claim.

Right now, the healthcare payment system is designed to reduce coverage, to reject treatment and ultimately fail the patient, because it's for profit and run by insurance companies who, like wolves guarding the henhouse, have opposing interests to actually healing the sick. Do you have a pre-existing condition such as cancer? Good luck finding healthcare, and you just may go broke trying to stay alive. Did you make a claim recently? You might just be the victim of healthcare recission as I was, where your company dumps you soon after. Do you need a particular test that a for-profit insurance company deems too expensive? You may just not get it. Is your insurance company owned by idealogues who oppose birth control? Maybe this is why the pill or abortion often isn't covered, yet childbirth (a much more expensive option) is covered.

Many of us get health-insurance through employers, but I find this to be a flawed system. Health insurance should be a valid option for the individual and not related to your source of income. What about those who are unemployed as much of the U.S. finds themselves to be in this economic downturn? Should the unemployed also be out in the cold with regard to health insurance? Talk about a double-whammy. What about those who can't work but would otherwise be willing to?

What America needs is some kind of standardized healthcare for everyone with nobody being rejected for a 'pre-existing' condition or being dumped because they made a claim. If you can't make a claim for insurance, why bother having it at all? We should not be penalizing those who truly need to make a claim.

One shocking fact is this...although America leaves nearly 50-million Americans uninsured, the National Coalition on Health Care (NCHC) reports that America spends 17.6% of our Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on healthcare, whereas every other developed nation with Universal Health Care spends less, MUCH less on health care..usually less than half.

The Japanese actually visit the doctor most, according to Reid's book, and their system is still cheaper than ours and one of the most efficient in the world. Japan only spends about 8% of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) on health insurance, while America spends 17.6% of its GDP on healthcare yet leaves nearly 50 million Americans uninsured...this is repeated just to drive home the fact that every other nation with Universal healthcare does it way cheaper than the broken American system.

The Japanese system has very strict limits on what hospitals/doctors can charge. Their doctors make a healthy living, but nothing compared to what U.S. doctors make, who are still often hamstrung in their decision-making by insurance companies such as HMO's who are way-too involved with the bottom-line or private inusrance companies who have to promise a return to investors.

France is rated by the World Health Organization as having the best health care in the world, the world's richest nation (the U.S.) rates 37th! France also spends much less than America on their system (about 10% of its GDP), partially due to the efficiency of their system. For example, they don't have the huge administrative costs we have the U.S. One thing they've done is eliminate paper medical records, filing, storing, etc. They store your entire medical history on a digital card you carry on your person, called the 'Carte Vitale'. Every required detail of your medical history is on the card and can easily be accessed by French doctors. Recently, American HMO, Kaiser Permanente switched to the card system. This is a step in the right direction as our entire healthcare system undergoes reform.

The British system, commonly known as 'National Health Insurance' or 'NHS', was designed and written by William Beveridge. Beveridge was an aristocrat, social-reformer at the turn of the 20th century. This likely-atheist who eschewed the clergy profession is quoted as saying, 'I believe neither in Heaven, which would be insipid, nor in Hell, which would be ridiculous'. During Britain's post-war rebuilding efforts in the 1940's, Beveridge was given an opportunity by Winston Churchhill to lead the way to a new healthcare system, which he pretty-much single-handedly drafted in what was known as 'Social Insurance and Allied Services', and was wildly popular with the British people. His popularization of his plan via numerous speeches spread the idea thoroughly.

This Beveridge plan was later put into law by Welshman Aneurin 'Nye' Bevan who witnessed the death of four of his siblings growing up. With his hardscrabble coal-miner roots and more aggressive personality, he went on to become a Union agitator and politician, elected to the House of Commons as the Labour Party candidate. As a result of the efforts of Beveridge, Bevan and others, the National Health Service opened on July 5th, 1948 for everyone in the U.K.

This Beveridge-Bevan system (NHS) is a no-pay at the point of service healthcare, except for small co-pays for prescriptions which is waived for children, anyone over sixty, pregnant women and the chronically ill. The taxes in Britain are higher, about 15 to 17.5%, but the difference is, you won't go broke from some catastrophic injury or illness if you're caught without insurance, no fighting insurance companies to retain coverage if you're sick, no being dropped for pre-existing conditions and you won't lose your home for lack of medical insurance or worse, your life for fear of medical bills and delayed care. The NHS does use a Gatekeeper system to see a specialist, just like in the U.S., and this helps control costs, the difference is, the NHS covers everyone in the UK.

With all of the spending on healthcare, the U.S. still ranks 37th in the world in healthcare, 22nd when it comes to infant mortality. For the richest nation on Earth, these results are more evidence how much the healthcare system needs to be improved.

People seem to fear 'socialized medicine' as they call it because it would 'limit choice'. Not so. In Germany under the Bismarck model, they have a system similar to what Americans have with employer-based insurance, and can choose between 200 different private insurance companies which they keep their entire lives. They're covered under private insurance longer than Americans! However, those German insurance companies have to offer the basic insurance package guaranteed by the government at fixed rates, and cannot decline people based on pre-existing conditions or dump someone, as long as people pay their premiums. German insurance companies do compete for those government dollars in the form of added-value and quick payments, and some for-profit insurance companies in Germany will offer additional services not covered under the basic plan.

Americans over 65 switch to Medicare, which in fact was invented by a Canadian socialist by the name of Tommy Clement Douglas, who is lauded as a hero in Canada even over the likes of Wayne Gretsky or Alexander Graham Bell. When it comes to veterans, nobody complains about 'socialized' medicine even though it's nearly that. Veterans are covered by the government, and this is the closest system to 'socialized medicine' that America has, but it works.

The ones who are left in the cold are the backbone of America's economy, and that's the working class who often can't afford health insurance or can't get it through their employer, or through discriminatory domestic-partner laws (straight couples under the age of 62 are not eligible).

There is a mandate to have car-insurance. Fail to get it, and the DMV is notified and your registration is suspended. Your privilege to drive is contingent on having auto-insurance (and a valid registration). If you make a claim, you may get dumped by your current company, but *someone* will cover you. Cancer that nobody could have hoped to foresee or cure alone should no more be a case for denial than a not-at-fault car-accident claim should be a reason to deny someone car insurance.

Having a mandate for health-insurance is required simply because if insurance is to cover *everyone*, then *everyone* should be paying into it. This could be done through taxes like the U.K. system or a mandated yearly fee like other systems. Either way, this is pennies compared to trying to pay for a week-long hospital stay out-of-pocket should the need arise or worse, paying out-of-pocket for treatment of a chronic illness like cancer. People often go broke for nothing but the results of unforseen medical expenses, and it's a crying shame. This can't be good for Americans or the economy.

We need a simple, effective, tax-funded healthcare system for everyone, regardless of claims or pre-existing conditions. Whether we use the co-pay system of France (which is refunded) to remind people that healthcare costs money, or a system of private insurance companies who compete for perks but are not 'for profit', something, almost *anything* would be an improvement on being 37th in the world for healthcare when we're the richest nation on Earth.

With nearly 50-million people who aren't insured and successful systems all over the world to learn from, it's high time we did *something* to revolutionize our healthcare and make it available for everyone. Even if it's not you going bankrupt or dying to the current system, the failure of the current system affects us all.

T.R. Reid gives real hope that if America can humble itself and learn from others, we too can enjoy amazingly good healthcare for everyone and for much less than we spend now. As Michael Moore's documentary, 'Sicko' points out, Americans have no issues adopting better technology when we see it....from Japanese cars to Swiss watches...why on Earth aren't we cherry-picking the best Universal Health Care systems from around the world and putting them into practice in America?

And now for the atheist angle...why on Earth is the world's most religious developed nation leaving so many people out in the cold when it comes to health insurance? Those who are so worried about abortion and gay people being allowed to marry should really pay attention to the real travesty...millions of people who die from otherwise treatable diseases. No wonder gay people want to be able to marry...some of them probably just want health insurance. Who can blame them.

We really have nothing to lose, and everything to gain....especially for the nearly 50 million Americans without healthcare.

-dB-

America is (Not) a Christian Nation.

There are some who will go to any length to convince you of their brand of religion, including revising U.S. History. This is either an honestly mistaken belief due to an amazing historical ignorance or a lie perpetrated to convince others to embrace Christianity. Either way it's an anti-intellectual affront and needs to be confronted whenever it's repeated.

Our forefathers had the tremendous foresight to collectively forge the first-ever secular Constitution on the planet. The Constitution, our founding document, is godless. There is no mention of following any commandments, no religious decrees, no deference to commandments or Bibles. It's a secular governmental document, by the people and for the people, not by god(s) or for any god(s). Our founding fathers understood that unless we are free *from* religion we cannot enjoy religious freedom at all.

If you lived in pre-1776 England, you would not have had the choice of which religion you followed in the English church-state. In fact, the European witch-hunts were in full-swing at the time...admitting any kind of non-orthodoxy was still a life-risking proposition, let alone the deism of Thomas Jefferson or the atheism of James Madison.

The 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution says it plainly;

'Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibit the free-exercise thereof'.

This means, in matters of religion, government is neutral. Religion nor atheism should be endorsed by any government-entity. Likewise, the government legal process should not include any kind of religious test, including swearing on a Koran, the Vedas, Talmud or Bible.

How would it feel to have an entire-courtroom see you refuse to swear on a Bible before your testimony even begins? This could affect the outcome of the trial if the jury or judge is very religious, and it's tantamount to an unconstitutional religious-test and is in clear-violation of the 1st-amendment. Yet, this happens every-day in America.

The removal of religious-oppression by government-entities such as courtrooms, public schools, presidential inaugurations, public monuments, etc. is *not* tantamount to atheism, as some might propose. It's simply neutrality. There should not be any government endorsement of religion or active rejection thereof as stated clearly in the 1st amendment.

The 1797 Treaty of Tripoli explicitly states in Article 11 that America is not a Christian Nation.

'Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries'.

Some would claim that our money is 'evidence' that this is a 'Christian Nation' by virtue of the fact that it's been infected with the religious slogan; 'In God We Trust'. Similarly, our pledge also has 'Under God' in it, which some believe is further evidence that this nation was intended to be god-fearing.

It might surprise some to know that the religious-language on our money and in our pledge are recent developments, and were originally secular.

Our pledge was written in 1892 by a Baptist minister, Francis Bellamy, and did not originally include 'Under God'. The divisive 'Under God' was added in 1954 by President Eisenhower at the behest of Christian special-interest groups such as the Knights of Columbus. Here's the unblemished pledge before it was altered:

'I pledge allegiance to the flag, of the United States of America,
and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, indivisible
with liberty and justice for all'.

One might note that the original pledge is all-inclusive. The addition of 'Under God' instantly forces everyone reciting the pledge to be 'under' something, subserviant to an unseen 'diety' which has dominion over all, and makes all non-Christians and non-believers second-class citizens. It's amazingly divisive and is a clear violation of the intentions of the forefathers and the 1st-amendment.

Our money has 'In God We Trust' on it, but this wasn't added until 1957 on paper money, though it was on coins earlier. Most likely, the 'In God We Trust' motto was a reaction to McCarthyism and the 'Red Scare' associated with communism and atheism. However, it's possible to be a communist without being an atheist and most atheists are decidedly not communists.

Prior to religious-prayer now on our currency the Latin motto was 'E Pluribus Unem', which literally translates to 'From Many, One'. This phrase is all-inclusive regardless of religious-association or lack thereof. 'In God We Trust' is divisive, simply because people worship different gods and some don't submit to any gods. Again, this religious-notion violates the intention of the founding fathers and the 1st-amendment, and forces non-Christians and the non-religious to be party to theist-oppression. Our secular democratic republic is not merely majority rule, but serves to protect the minority from the majority. Otherwise, Jim Crow laws would still be in force, and women would still be disallowed from the voting booth. In the same manner, it's not Constitutionally right to oppress non-Christians and non-religious Americans with conflicting religious whims of a Christian majority.

Removing the oppressive religious language unconstitutionally-inserted into our pledge, money, court-rooms, schools, public parks or any governmental agency is a return to government neutrality and secularism as the founding fathers rightly intended. This neutrality still allows freedom of religion. The difference is that government should not endorse any one religion over another, or endorse religion over irrelegion.

Our forefathers and early patriots sought to escape the church-state of England, and many died establishing and defending the new colonies and the first-ever secular Constitution. We as free Americans should uphold church-state separation and the 1st amendment, because if there's no freedom *from* religion then there is truly no freedom of religion. If we slip into a theocractic church-state again we'll be right back where started in 1775 England.

As is often said, those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." -Thomas Jefferson

-dB-