A "die-hard conservative Republican" embraces Universal Health Care
Someone on my Twitter feed just linked me to this article. Really excellent read about someone who comes to the realization that they have been lied to for a long time about how Universal Health Care works. The author describes herself as a "die-hard conservative Republican" several times, who was disgusted by the idea of being under a gov't mandated health plan in Canada.
I'm Canadian, so I can't really speak to her experience in the US system, but having grown up in Canada, and having used the system all my life, her experience with the Canadian system rings true.
Some excerpts:
When I moved to Canada in 2008, I was a die-hard conservative Republican. So when I found out that we were going to be covered by Canada's Universal Health Care, I was somewhat disgusted. This meant we couldn't choose our own health coverage, or even opt out if we wanted too. It also meant that abortion was covered by our taxes, something I had always believed was horrible. I believed based on my politics that government mandated health care was a violation of my freedom.
Fast forward a little past the Canadian births of my third and fourth babies. I had better prenatal care than I had ever had in the States. I came in regularly for appointments to check on my health and my babies' health throughout my pregnancy, and I never had to worry about how much a test cost or how much the blood draw fee was. With my pregnancies in the States, I had limited my checkups to only a handful to keep costs down. When I went in to get the shot I needed because of my negative blood type, it was covered. In fact I got the recommended 2 doses instead of the more risky 1 dose because I didn't have to worry about the expense. I had a wide array of options and flexibility when it came to my birth, and care providers that were more concerned with my health and the health of my baby than how much money they might make based on my birth, or what might impact their reputation best. When health care is universal, Drs are free to recommend and provide the best care for every patient instead of basing their care on what each patient can afford.
The only concern I was left with was the fact that abortion was covered by the universal health care, and I still believed that was wrong. But as I lived there, I began to discover I had been misled in that understanding as well. Abortion wasn't pushed as the only option by virtue of it being covered. It was just one of the options, same as it was in the USA. In fact, the percentage rates of abortion are far lower in Canada than they are in the USA, where abortion is not covered by insurance and is often much harder to get. In 2008 Canada had an abortion rate of 15.2 per 1000 women (In other countries with government health care that number is even lower), and the USA had an abortion rate of 20.8 abortions per 1000 women. And suddenly I could see why that was the case. With Universal coverage, a mother pregnant unexpectedly would still have health care for her pregnancy and birth even if she was unemployed, had to quit her job, or lost her job.
Read the whole story here:
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/07/12/how-i-lost-my-fear-universal-health-care
GreenPartyVoter
(73,068 posts)iemitsu
(3,888 posts)unfortunately for americaans many of us never travel abroad where we could actually compare what we live like to others.
our media and our insistence on believing we are exceptionally special allow those who want to lie to us to get away with it all the time.
if more spotted the lies there would be a revolution here.
Scuba
(53,475 posts).
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
valerief
(53,235 posts)littlemissmartypants
(25,599 posts)progressoid
(50,757 posts)Raster
(20,999 posts)...for-pay health care insurance, which adds NOTHING positive to the mix. Nothing. It's all a scheme so rich corporations and rich individuals can profit off of other people's illness.
murphyj87
(649 posts)If you can't afford public, non profit health care, you sure as hell can't afford private, for profit health care.
cleduc
(653 posts)My family has used both heath care systems (US & Canada) since the early 1970s.
The thing that blew me away was watching Obama's town halls in the 2008 campaign. The stories coming out from people who lacked health care were absolutely heartbreaking.
Then Alan Grayson hammered home the point on the floor of congress referencing Harvard's report that 44,000 Americans were dying every year due to a lack of health care. He mentioned a young man who passed on cancer treatment and went home to die so that his care wouldn't put his wife and kids into bankruptcy. Words cannot adequately describe my horrible feelings about that.
And that's where the GOP logic was completely lost for me. The GOP would spend trillions fighting wars in the Middle East but wouldn't spend a fraction of that to save the lives of their own citizens. I will never ever understand or accept that position from the richest country on earth. And Mitt Romney wants to go back to that. On that issue alone, I could never support him because on Day 1, he effectively wants 44,000 Americans people to resume dying without heath care each year. It makes no sense.
The US spends dramatically more on health care per capita than any other nation on earth. Yet US life expectancy is way down the list. For what the US spends, they should be at the top of the list or very close to it.
Part of the trouble for US jobs is the global competition. Whether a US company pays or an individual pays, that drives the cost of a US job for a company up. And therefore, that costs the US jobs.
If the US went to single payer, they could enjoy Canadian health care service levels & Canadian life expectancy (top 10 in the world) for very roughly about 60% of the cost the US is paying now and the entire country would be covered = 44,000 fewer deaths per year. That would also put a big dent into the US deficit AND bring a bunch of jobs home to the US. So even if those hard hearted don't care about US people dying without health care, it would help the US economy and the US deficit. The big losers would be the insurance companies who like Romney, probably stash a bunch of their cash overseas to avoid taxes.
If I were making an ad against Romney, I'd show the Harvard report (and others like it) and then show Romney heartlessly directing a death sentence to those people on Day 1 of his administration.
Sorry for the rant but this issue upsets me because it's so needless. There is a better way. Obamacare is far from perfect but you at least have a framework to get there. Romney offers nothing but a return to what doesn't work beyond continuing to make the rich richer.
daleanime
(17,796 posts)Feel free to rant like that any time you want.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)it is nothing but political propaganda. they are literally letting thousands of Americans die every year to score political points (and keep their insurance donors rich).
area51
(12,150 posts)Also, GingrichCare will not get us to single-payer; exactly the opposite, as it enshrines the existence of for-profit, serial killer insurance companies who get between the doctor and their patient, refuse to pay for care, bankrupt and kill people. GingrichCare uses the govt. IRS as an enforcement mechanism; blatantly unconstitutional to use the IRS as enforcers for private companies.
It's actually 100,000 people who die per year in the U.S. due to lack of health care.
And yet this nation can find all sorts of $$$ to pay for multiple wars of choice.
The only reason why the U.S. got school lunches is that so many recruits were too malnourished to become soldiers in WWII. That's all that fscking matters, having well-fed soldiers for our wars; not having healthy citizens.
We need a single-payer type system.
What are war-mongers refuse to acknowledge is that having sick citizens is a national security issue.
"Employer-based health insurance has always been a bad idea. Your life should not depend on who you work for." -- T. McKeon[br]
[font face="times"]"Any proposal that sticks with our current dependence on for-profit private insurers ... will not be sustainable. And the new law will not get us to universal coverage ...." -- T.R. Reid, The Healing of America[/font]
"Despite the present hyperbole by its supporters, this latest effort will end up as just another failed reform effort littering the landscape of the last century." --John Geyman, M.D., Hijacked! The Road to Single Payer in the Aftermath of Stolen Health Care Reform
yesphan
(1,599 posts)Thanks.
Oh, and welcome to DU !
I'm not new to DU, but I don't post much. I've posted more as of late, but I've been reading DU for a long time, and enjoy it.
I miss the Top 10 Conservative Idiots column!
bluestate10
(10,942 posts)than I had seen any where else I had been. One coworker at the time moved to the state to work because of the care his developmentally disabled son would get. During my time living in my state, the program has continued. Mitt Romney cut it back, but Deval Patrick restored it to it's past level. In my state, developmentally disabled adults can live independently, with visits from an assistant that helped them with issues like shopping and transportation. Some of the adults work regular jobs. I am proud to be a small part of my state.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)that's the main point IMO
Saviolo
(3,321 posts)You can really see it in this article how betrayed she feels about being lied to so systematically. Being told over and over again how severely the Canadian system screws its users and costs money for no benefit. It's entirely fabricated, and is one of the major talking points used to dissuade people from supporting a Single Payer model in the US.
Bill USA
(6,436 posts)recommended!
Delayed thanks, at least I felt like it should be spread around, too!
rpritchard93
(18 posts)Why can't Hillary!?! Her recent attacks on Bernie are so ingenuous...