Cheney would "probably be dead by now" if not for his federally funded health care

[pickledpepperRN]

December 7, 2007, 2:58 pm

Nurses' Health-Care Ad Takes Aim at Cheney

Susan Davis reports on health care.

Vice President Dick Cheney would "probably be dead by now" if not for his federally funded health care, according to an eye-catching ad calling for universal health care that will run Monday in ten Iowa newspapers. The ad is union-funded by the California Nurses Association and its national arm, the National Nurses Organizing Committee, which represents 75,000 nurses.

"The patient's history and prognosis were grim: four heart attacks, quadruple bypass surgery, angioplasty, an implanted defibrillator and now an emergency procedure to treat an irregular heartbeat," the ad states, referencing Cheney's lengthy medical chart. "For millions of Americans, this might be a death sentence. For the vice president, it was just another medical treatment. And it cost him very little."

The group is calling on the presidential candidates to support a single-payer government-run health-care bill introduced in Congress by Rep. John Conyers (D., Mich.) that has 88 co-sponsors, including long-shot Democratic candidate Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio.

The three Democratic front-runners have all proposed sweeping plans to cover all or nearly all uninsured. Republicans have offered more modest plans and none advocate a single-payer system. The nurses group opposes the plans of Sens. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and former Sen. John Edwards because they argue that each plan will "continue to rely upon the wasteful inclusion of private insurance companies." The single-payer plan would take insurance companies out of the equation altogether. ...

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2007/12/07/nurses-health-care-ad-takes-aim-at-cheney/

[ZASHAGALKA, RN]

I think the real point was that if he was an average Joe walking down the street in Okoboji IA that he would have difficulty with accessing and paying for quality care.

Not if he were responsible enough to have insurance, like most of us do.

The concept that you need the gov't for that is scary. The gov't is not your friend. If the 'average Joe' can't afford his own health insurance, he certainly can't afford a place at the gov't's looting table. The gov't is bought and sold by the highest bidder, and most likely, that ain't you.

Do I want self-important do-nothing Washington 'power players' in gov't bidding, bribing and lobbying wars grifting over my healthcare? no. No. NO. NOOOOOOOOO! That's just not compassionate.

~faith,

Timothy.

[HM2VikingRN, RN]

Nothing in my post implied that the average Joe was irresponsible or did not have health insurance. My post spoke to the very real problems of access, equity and affordability of health insurance for middle class Americans.

My challenge has been and remains for anyone to demonstrate with research driven and academically supported data that a consumer driven health care system for the US could deliver equal health outcomes to those achieved by the UK, France, Canada, NZ or AUS. The evidence says that the single payer systems do a better job.

Paul Krugman (in writing about the subprime mess) makes a point that I think applies equally to this discussion:

At a deep level, I believe that the problem was ideological: Policy makers, committed to the view that the market is always right, simply ignored the warning signs.

source: http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/12/03/opinion/edkrugman.php accessed today.

I think that the data says that a failure to establish effective cost controls over health care inflation through adoption of primary prevention focused care, evidence based medicine, and achieving control of administrative costs through large risk pools will destroy the US economy and significantly impoverish our children. Our children are already on track to be less well off than their parents. Why not adopt proven methods to stop the economic train wreck.

[LydiaNN]

I just feel honored to have this marvelous opportunity to subsidize Dick Cheney's existence...:bowingpur:bowingpur:bowingpur

[ZASHAGALKA, RN]

I just feel honored to have this marvelous opportunity to subsidize Dick Cheney's existence...:bowingpur:bowingpur:bowingpur

Me, too.

But, I suspect that YOU were being sarcastic.

~faith,

Timothy.

[Spidey's mom, ADN, BSN, RN]

For the record, I suspect my daughter's current bill will end up being somewhere north of half a million dollars. My out of pocket maximum cost will be 3 grand. For me, THAT is what health insurance does. But see, THAT kind of expense is what insurance is SUPPOSED to cover: a protection against a catastrophic loss. Health Insurance today, in the main, can't really be called insurance: it is pre-paid healthcare. If car insurance were run like health 'insurance' then it would cover gas and oil changes - - - and cost 550 dollars a month. Oh. And 47 million drivers would be unable to afford it, depending upon their own means to put gas in their cars, not to mention, totally unprepared for 'catastrophic' need, such as an accident.

Maybe the government should provide us all with universal car insurance? To do less would be uncompassionate. Yes? By the gov't's definition of 'insurance', that would mean, gas would be 'free'. All the gas you want, all the time, at no cost to you (except for taxes and the 'rich' will pay most of that). And all the gas stations will be open, full of gas, with no lines. Right? (Hint, don't let the gov't's price fixing/gas rationing of the '70's influence your opinion of this great idea.)

~faith,

Timothy.

This is exactly the problem - very well stated too.

I doubt we can ever go back . . but I'd love to have insurance for catastrophic things only and pay out of pocket for doctor's visits and meds. Then the market would lower the prices of those things.

steph

[tntrn, ASN, RN]

My husband was diagnosed with an aggressive prostate cancer on November 27, 2007. On December 6, 2007, he had a radical retropubic prostatectomy. Based on the article I've linked below, in Canada he'd be long dead before a surgery would be possible.

http://www.thenewstribune.com/opinion/insight/story/224748.html

This article was a timely one for me to read, and I find it very interesting in that the physician who wrote it works in the US and in Canada, leading me to believe he knows what he's talking about.

We have friends in Britain, who fortunately, can afford PRIVATE insurance along with what the government provides. Meaning, of course, that they can get care far more quickly when they need it.

[CRNA2007]

What about the profit you take from healthcare dollars? Are you willing to give that back and become a not for profit yourself?

Tricare works

VA medical system works

FEHP works

Medicare works

The assorted state employee health plans work

Why not build a large group plan to cover ALL Americans?

We cannot continue to spend 31% of our health care dollars on Administration and profit.

The evidence shows that single payer will provide better care at a lower cost...

Most Americans believe that this should be a shared responsibility:

[Jolie, BSN]

https://allnurses.com/forums/f195/medicare-cutbacks-lined-falling-wages-pittsburgh-266591.html

The article oramar posted in another thread shows us what happens to hospital employees' and physicians' wages when a government insurance program cuts reimbursement rates. It is naive to think that the same (or worse) won't happen if all healthcare is sponsored by the government.

[LydiaNN]

What about the profit you take from healthcare dollars? Are you willing to give that back and become a not for profit yourself?

Many of us work for non-profit entities. It doesn't mean we don't get paid, or that we shouldn't and it never did.

[HM2VikingRN, RN]

[HM2VikingRN, RN]

[HM2VikingRN, RN]

We should be looking at what NZ, Ger, AUS and the UK are doing right and use that knowledge to improve our own system.