|
Rae Vogeler on Health Care
|
Single-payer system eliminates administrative waste
Q: Do you support more federal funding for health coverage? A: Yes, I strongly favor that. Under a universal national single-payer health care system, the administrative waste of private insurance corporations would be redirected to patient care.
If the US were to shift to a system of universal coverage and a single payer plan, as in Canada, the savings in administrative costs would be more than enough to offset the cost. Expenses for businesses currently providing coverage would be reduced.
State and local governments would pay less because they would cease to be the "dumping ground" for high-risk patients and those rejected by HMOs when they become disabled and unemployed. Most importantly, people will gain peace of mind in knowing that
needed health care will always be available to them. No longer will people have to worry about facing financial disaster if they become seriously ill, are laid off their jobs, or are injured in an accident.
Source: Email interview with OnTheIssues.org
Oct 1, 2006
Supports universal national single-payer health care system
A universal, comprehensive, national single-payer health plan can provide the following with no increase in cost: - Publicly funded health care insurance, administered at the state and local levels.
- Lifetime benefits. No one will lose coverage
for any reason.
- Freedom to choose the type of health care provider, with a wide range of health care choices.
- Decision-making in the hands of health providers and their patients.
- Comprehensive benefits, including dental, vision, mental health
care, hospice, long-term care, substance abuse treatment and medication coverage.
- Participation of all licensed and/or certified health providers.
- Focus on primary and preventive care, including wellness education about diet, nutrition and
exercise.
- Greatly reduced paperwork for both patients and providers.
- Fair and full reimbursement to providers for their services.
- Cost controls via national fee schedules; Prices of medications must be publicly supervised.
Source: Email interview with OnTheIssues.org
Oct 1, 2006
Single-payer provides better health at same cost
Under a universal national single-payer health care system, the administrative waste of private insurance corporations would be redirected to patient care. A universal, comprehensive, national single-payer health plan can provide the following with no
increase in cost:- Publicly funded health care insurance, administered at the state and local levels.
- Lifetime benefits. No one will lose coverage for any reason.
- Freedom to choose the type of health care provider, with a wide range of
health care choices.
- Decision-making in the hands of health providers and their patients.
- Focus on primary and preventive care.
- Greatly reduced paperwork for both patients and providers.
- Fair and full reimbursement to providers for
their services.
- Cost controls via streamlined administration, national fee schedules, bulk purchases of drugs and medical equipment, and coordination of capital expenditures. Prices of medications must be publicly supervised.
Source: Campaign website, www.voterae.org, "Platform"
Jan 25, 2006
Health care should not be a privilege
Provide universal health care: The richest country in the world can afford health care for its citizens. Our health care system is plagued by high costs and unequal access.
Countries that have national health care achieve high life expectancies at a fraction of the money spent in the US. Health care should not be a privilege. Our life expectancy should not be tied to income and employment.
Source: Campaign website, www.voterae.org, "Platform"
Jan 25, 2006
Supports universal national single-payer health care
If the US were to shift to a system of universal coverage and a single payer plan, as in Canada, the savings in administrative costs would be more than enough to offset the cost. Expenses for businesses currently providing coverage would be reduced.
State and local governments would pay less because they would receive reimbursement for services provided to the previously uninsured, and because public programs would cease to be the dumping ground for high-risk patients and those rejected by HMOs.
Source: Campaign website, www.voterae.org, "Platform"
Jan 25, 2006