Single payer still makes sense r
The commentary by Sen. Patti Komline and Rep. Heidi Scheuerman, ďHealth Care Must Work for All,Ē in the Times Argus and Rutland Herald predictably has taken the Shumlin administration to task concerning the health exchange rollout and its IT problems. Also predictably, they think the solution for universal affordable health care is more health insurance companies and less regulation despite decades of evidence to the contrary. Just to recap such negative evidence, the U.S. model for health care based on insurance is the most expensive, with poorer results, than virtually all economically advanced countries, according to the CIA World Factbook. They also take a swipe at the Vermont-run single-payer health care plan, Green Mountain Care, due in 2017, mainly because of a projected $2.2 billion cost. However, they conveniently omit the fact that it will replace the $2.6 billion plus we now spend on premiums and other out-of-pocket expenses ó with a system that fails at universal coverage. The $2.6 billion figure was as of 2011 and is certainly higher in 2014. Komline and Scheuermann say single payer wonít provide the universal and accessible results they claim to want but donít say why.
This is in spite of the success of Medicare, our closest thing to single -payer health care. Has any Medicare recipient had such problems enrolling when they turn 65?
We need a simplified, universal system that is funded by a personís ability to pay, such as Green Mountain Careís single payer. Those who try to equate the overly complicated, expensive and obviously IT unfriendly ACA insurance-based exchanges with Green Mountain Care are mainly doing it out of political self- interest and/or have vested interests in insurance-based health care.