Health coverage 'plan' was no insurance at all

Well the government is in fact you and I, isn't it?

My desire is to make certain that each and every American citizen has access to quality health care, without breaking the bank. We are America, every other developed nation has found a way, we can find a way as well.

And that, is what Jesus of Nazareth would call loving thy neighbor.

It is clear that a couple of the posters on this thread are very much against health insurance reform...I just cannot figure out what is so attractive to them about our status quo...what is so desireable in our current state of affairs that they are dead set against reform/change?

One might think that with our current system "joe blow" tax payer does not have any financial investment in the health of his neighbor "joe irresponsible" who has no savings, no insurance, and lives well beyond his means. Indeed, reading the posts of the opposition to reform, one might get the impression that only dead beats and shopaholics with credit card debt in the 6 figures are the ones with problems with health expenses. Or that the only people who are denied care by their insurance companies are idiots that don't take the time to read or investigate. That medical bankrupcy can be prevented by better planning.

Is it clear to the opposition that our country cannot afford to continue on the current path regarding healthcare? Healthcare currently costs us in the ballpark of 16% of our GDP, and is expected to reach 20% in the near future. As a nation we cannot sustain that AND have a manufacturing base.

It's quite clear that some of us are opposed to a GOVERNMENT plan to run healthcare in this country. Actually, what the Dems want is for us to buy the very insurance they claim isn't very good. That makes no sense to me. And Obama says we can keep what we have if we like it. So he thinks some of us like what we have. Is that obvious?

Medicare as we know it now is a big part of the problem. Medicare doesn't pay the going rate so hospitals, docs, NH etc. have to make up the shortfall by charging John Q. Public more. And again the government wants to give away more low paying healthcare and cause more increases in premiums and fees.

I realize that defining what the "problem" is needs to be priority. Profits for insurance companies, hospitals, clinics, surgicenters, etc is not a "problem", those endeavors are by and large profitable. What is problematic is that the American people, increasingly, are unable to afford good health insurance outside of a large employer, if they change employers or lose their job...bye bye insurance. What is problematic is that people who are working poor and have no insurance may have no access to primary care dependent upon where they live...many docs only see people with insurance, not private pay (cash). What is a problem is that people who have insurance can be denied coverage by their insurance and then, in the midst of the financial and health woes of a very expensive foray as an uninsured into the acute medical world, they have to fight an expensive legal battle with an insurance company. Too many are sick and overwhelmed and the time limit flies by them. What is a problem is that people have health insurance but are required to fork over thousands of additional dollars for their healthcare, causing many of them to forego important care in order to do other important things.
We need to have reform that provides good, affordable basic insurance options for every American citizen.

Yea we can!
The people of Mississippi deserve healthcare the same as the President, a senator, CEO, and big city cab driver.

We can set up hospitals in Iraq. Why not in Mississippi?