Does the U.S. Need Government-mandated Universal Healthcare?

Reader Comments
Back to article

You are stupid. In the Uk, where they have the NHS, it is worst health system ever, I lived there for seven years, and eventually, everyone that I knew was paying for their health care because of the stupid doctors who don't care. My grandfather was having a heart attack, and they said 'I'm sorry, we can't afford to put you in the emergency room, you'll just have to wait'. We were there for three hours and he died in the waiting room for the emergency room. What they don't tell you is that the service sucks in other countries. It is unnecessary and kills people faster. You want to die while waiting for health care, well that is your problem don't place it on the rest of America. You will never again find a specialist if this bill goes through. All you will find are general practitioners. Don't become a pawn to a ridiculous government.

Ally of TX 12:33PM September 30, 2010

YES! Other countries that have it pay less and get better care. The system works and has worked in other countries for many years now. The fact is that the insurance companies are not acting justly. They don't even take care of what their business is. Their business is to pay for people's medical costs if they get sick. But when plans get 39% fee hikes and sick people are getting kicked off of their plans while the healthy are kept on...then it's just taking money away from people.
Right now the insurance companies have no one to answer to, and that is a big problem.

Jessica Schultze of CA 3:53AM February 20, 2010

The united states has universal health care in Medicare and medicade also SSi . all the government has to do is take the monies that is collects and get it out of the general fund and put it back where it once was . When Al Gore was Vice president he suggested this as a cure for the ailing health care system. Try it . It will work.

Don Halasy of NJ 3:47PM August 13, 2009

I think it does. The United States could save considerable amounts, in the billions, with this kind of care. It could reduce the need to use drugs to attempt to care for oneself because of better access. It could mean less crimes being committed by the desperate. And it will help reduce sick days, bring more people back to work, and get the moral up within the nation.
We are the only industrialized nation without this kind of health care. The Universal health care plan will not be a socialist program, it will be one of the best things that has happened to the US.
managed health care plans are a pain to deal with, this kind of plan would make it much easier. Just think Stafford Loans compared to high interest private student loans whose debt can't be forgiven even by bankruptcy. The government wants to make it EASIER. And to that I say if they can make this work, my hat goes off to them.

chris of VA 3:18PM July 17, 2009

I practiced hematology, oncology and internal medicine for 22 years before, at the age of 54, I had had quite enough. In the end, it was governmental paper-work that was my undoing. But it was more than this. Never having been sued, the other aspects within the medical-system pie proved too much. Corrupt insurance companies, the routine mark-up (150% sounds accurate) in prescrition drugs, and what I call "medicaid families"-who for generations- make their living by suing doctors, hospitals, restaurants and anyone else within their and attorney's target-sites, are some of the main actors.
However, unless President Obama seriously restructures the legal climate,the entire reform effort will be significantly compromised. Their is no way on God's green earth that any ER doctor for example, will be willing to forgo a significant measure of defensive practice with the legal practices in place at this time-it is not going to happen! The ENTIRE system of healthcare delivery must be restructured if one expects a more favorable outcome for our citixens and our country.

Joseph K. Smith md of IL 6:52PM July 07, 2009

I agree with the comment that Mr Newt Gingrich is fortunate to have health insurance (as a former Congressman, most likely paid for by our income taxes including the income of those who can't afford health insurance) Take Newt's insurance away like the other 50 million and I wonder if he would sing the same song? I understand what the OB/GYN has to say and can't totally disagree. However, is this justification to leave people hanging to the edge of the cliff without any coverage? I think not. I don't know what the solution is but I know what we have now just ain't working! To alleviate the concern of our OB/GYN, perhaps a USA version of the Swiss or Dutch programs.

Jerry Allen of IL 6:44PM February 12, 2009

you hear a lot of talk about tax increases if we were to switch to a universal heealth care......Those increases seem minimal if not less then what the average american is already paying for health coverage....I consider myself one of the lucky few, my health insurance for a family of five is costing me around $300 a month, i would gladly pay this amount in increased taxes if that meant universal coverage for everyone....my $300 a month does not include my 3000 dollar deductible that I must pay out of pocket everyyear and not to mention my $25 dollar co-pay when I go and see my Doctor......The proof is in the pudding universal health care works.....but are corrupt senators and members of congress would rather get rich off of insurance groups then see a healthy nation?

Rich Lush of GA 10:57AM February 10, 2009

I worked for a health plan for several years and the thing that struck me most, as someone who was paid handsomely to credential, recruit and negotiate fees with physicians, was that EVERY OTHER health insurance company was doing the same thing- going into the doctor's office to ensure quality care and checking that each physician was legitimate. Is it important that your insured population is receiving quality care? Of course! That's why I believe that the government needs to bid out many of the health plan's services to the lowest bidder and let the insurance companies eliminate ridiculous duplication of effort. Think of it- All the physicians in one state/region would have only one insurance company to deal with- claims would be simplified, only one site visit and credentialing qualification to meet, people would have access at a lower cost because of the stream-lined health plans. Insurance companies provide many jobs and therefore boost the economy themselves, but in the current system they are wasting wads of money on exorbitant duplication of effort. We as consumers need to have access to care at a reasonable cost and I think this would be a great beginning.

Jennifer of LA 9:53AM February 08, 2009

I am a physician with over fifty years providng medical services to patients, wealthy and poor alike. If Newt Gingrich, sitting on his cloud, with no true knowledge of a person's health needs, truly believes that the for profit, market directed economy is able to resolve the health care crisis, he has tunnel vision and is delusional. He is so entrenched in his conservative philosophy that that his reason and judgement are clouded and severely impaired. The free marketplace has failed health care delivery for over forty years and continues to deteriorate. People do not shop the system when they need health care, as they might when purchasing a car. They must accept whatever care is available to them. For almost one third of our residents, quality care may not be available in a timely manner, and most of these people may do without adequate care. Let us now face reality and quit tap dancing around the simplest and most reasonable solution to this overwhelming problem. Let's bite the bullet and institute a program that has been successful throughout the industrialized world. Let's do UNIVERSAL CARE Now!

gerald weiner of AZ 1:57PM February 07, 2009

Yes, we need Universal Health Care administered by the government.
1. Personally I don't trust the free market will put my health before the stockholder's and ceo's profits.
2. People in this country should all have health care coverage that is affordable to them.
3. The last I looked, Canadians, for instance, would in no way be willing to give up their health coverage.
4. People who argue for free market health care should be required to state the health insurance and related industries who pay/give money or other perks to them or their spouses, etc.
5. Our present free market health care has become truly unaffordable to many of our citizens. This is cruel and inhumane.
6. It's no skin off Newt Gingrich's back to pay for health care. It's another whole story for lower to middle-income families of four to pay $12000 to $15000 for heatlh care.

Diane B. of OR 3:38PM February 05, 2009