What Do We Know About Health Reform?

Sunday Morning: President Obama's Campaign for Support Tries To Drown Out Vocal (And Angry) Opposition

(CBS)  President Barack Obama continues his campaign-style effort to win the hearts and minds of Americans over health care reform. The latest stop - a town hall meeting in Grand Junction, Colorado.

"These struggles have always boiled down to a contest between hope and fear," the president said Saturday.

That was true when social security was born. That was true when Medicare was created. And it' s true in this debate today, reports CBS News correspondent Martha Teichner.

For the third time in five days, Mr. Obama used the presidential bully pulpit on behalf of what he's now calling health insurance reform in an effort to seize back control of the agenda from an angry opposition.

Here's a question: Do they even know what's in the bills currently being considered by Congress?

Do you?

"For all the chatter and yelling and shouting and the noise, what you need to know is this: If you don't have health insurance, you will finally have quality affordable options once we pass reform," Mr. Obama said last week at a town hall in Portsmouth, New Hampshire.

Right now, though, reform is a moving target, still changing. There is no such thing as an Obama bill.

Gibbs: No "Postal Service" for Health Care

Public Option Up in the Air After Comments

For Obama, Health Care Reform Gets Personal
Americans Historically Resistant to Reform

The president presented a wish list to Congress, where five different committees - three in the House and two in the Senate - are in various stages of drafting bills, with some big differences but a lot of similarities.

"All agree that all Americans should be covered. They all agree that you cannot be denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition," said Ralph Neas, CEO of the National Coalition on Health Care, a non-partisan alliance of groups working for health care reform.

"The all agree that if you leave a job, you don't lose health care coverage. They all agree if you have health care coverage, you can't be denied it once you get sick."

"And they would mandate that all but the smallest employers would have to provide insurance for their workers," adds Jonathan Oberlander, a professor of health policy and management at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

"The second thing that they would do is create a new marketplace, where the uninsured and small businesses could go to get insurance. It would be called a health insurance exchange and if you didn't have insurance from your employer, you would get subsidies from the government and you go to this exchange and you could choose what insurance plan you would have." Oberlander said.

And each of the proposals would expand Medicaid. Where there's disagreement is over how all of this will be paid … and over the so-called "public option," a government-run health care plan that would be available alongside private plans.

The public option is by no means a done deal, but tell that to the people doing all the yelling at town hall meetings last week.

"I don't want this country turning into Russia, turning into a socialist country," a woman said at a town hall organized by Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter, a Democrat. Specter denied that's where the country was heading.

"The reason they oppose the public option is they think it's a stalking horse. They think the real plan of President Obama, or those who want health care reform, is to have single-payer, totally government-run health care reform," Neas said. "It will fail if people think it is tilted to kill the private insurance industry."

And now to address some of the health care reform's hottest hot-button issues, such as the reference to a "death panel" on Sarah Palin's Facebook page.

"The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with downs syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's death panel so his bureaucrats can decide whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil," the message read.

The reality?

"You would have a greater chance of being killed by a Death Star in one of the Star Wars movies than you would being killed by a government-run death panel, which is to say they don't exist," Oberlander said.

Another hot-button issue - taxpayer-funded abortions.

"On the contrary, there is language in the House Energy and Commerce bill that says federal monies cannot be used for abortion," Neas said.

And what about those television ads aimed at the elderly, claiming that seniors may lose their own doctors?

"That is absolutely false," Oberlander said. "In fact, the opposite is true. This legislation is absolutely good for seniors."

"There is now, every year, $2.5 trillion spent on health care. The United States spends twice as much as the average of all the industrialized nations in the world. One half of all the foreclosures, one half of all the bankruptcies [in the country] are because people can't pay their medical bills and it's because of the broken system we have," Neas said.

The American public agrees.

"Our most recent poll found that more than eight out of 10 Americans think the U.S. health care system either needs fundamental change or needs to be completely rebuilt," said Sarah Dutton, the head of surveys at CBS News. "Even 70 percent of Republicans feel that way."

A poll at the end of July showed nearly two-thirds of Americans supporting some sort of public option - 66 percent exactly, although fewer Republicans, 49 percent, than Democrats, 85 percent.

Where Americans are most ambivalent is over the cost of health care reform.

"We can't spend any more money. We gotta stop," one angry opponent said in Mississippi.

That's the third hot-button issue.

"You can't tell us how you're going to pay for this," one person questioned Mr. Obama in Montana.

"Look, you're absolutely right that I can't cover another 46 million people for free," the president replied. "Two-thirds of the money we can obtain just from eliminating waste and inefficiencies."

But the Congressional Budget Office has put a trillion-dollar price tag on health care reform over the next 10 years and calculates it will add $239 billion to the federal deficit.

And what happens if health care reform fails?

"The Urban Institute estimates that as many as 66 million Americans could be without health insurance in 2019," Oberlander said.

"There is now, every year, $2.5 trillion spent on health care. This $2.5 trillion will soon be $3.5 trillion, $5 trillion. Our economy cannot sustain it now," Neas said.

In the face of these estimates, President Obama has often repeated the message that "for all the scare tactics out there, what is truly scary is if we do nothing."

A contest between hope and fear is what Mr. Obama has called the fight for health care reform. At week's end, with the decibel level still rising, President Obama's battle cry had the unmistakable sound of his presidential campaign.

"I need your help," the president said in Colorado. "I need you to stand against the politics of fear and division. I need you to knock on doors and spread the word."

[texwebster]

Wow, I hate to see it happen. I've been a fan of Sunday Morning on CBS for many years, but I'm just barely hanging on at this point.
One of the things I've always liked about the show was the lack political indoctrination disguised as news, or even worse, a human interest story. But I'm sad to report, over the last few years CBS has been squeezing in more of their political junk, ruining my pleasant Sunday Morning. I'm not talking about the commentaries, because I do not expect CBS to be anything but bias; although they do occasionally allow Ben Stein to lend a modicum balance.
It's stories like the one-sided farce by Martha Teichner "What Do We Know About Health Reform?" that make me cringe and will eventually force me to give up watching CBS altogether, except maybe for sports. Commenting on the "angry opposition," with her bifocals drooping off her nose, Martha arrogantly asks, "Here's a question: Do they even know what's in the bills currently being considered by Congress?" I guess when you're talking down to people, it's hard to be anything but obnoxious.
You dummy, that's the whole point. Average Americans don't want a 1200 page bill full of gobblygook and indecipherable legalisms rammed down their throat. That why they are angry. Have you forgotten that it was your beloved Obama administration that pushed to have this paper monster become law before members of Congress had time to read it, much less understand the fine print. What happened to the exalted campaign promise of posting legislation on the Internet and giving people a reasonable amount time to understand the details?
And I don't want to even mention that ridiculous second story about health care in France, except to point out that you must be in the country LEGALLY to receive all those alleged glorious benefits. Obama Care will grant free health care to well over 12 MILLION illegal aliens in this country. That's 12 million of our hard working American senior citizens that will have to settle for counseling instead of the heath care they deserve.
My question is: "What Does Martha Teichner Know About Health Reform?"

[texwebster]

Wow, I hate to see it happen. I?ve been a fan of Sunday Morning on CBS for many years, but I?m just barely hanging on at this point.
One of the things I?ve always liked about the show was the lack political indoctrination disguised as news, or even worse, a human interest story. But I?m sad to report, over the last few years CBS has been squeezing in more of their political junk, ruining my pleasant Sunday Morning. I?m not talking about the commentaries, because I do not expect CBS to be anything but bias; although they do occasionally allow Ben Stein to lend a modicum balance.
It?s stories like the one-sided farce by Martha Teichner ?What Do We Know About Health Reform?? that make me cringe and will eventually force me to give up watching CBS altogether, except maybe for sports. Commenting on the ?angry opposition,? with her bifocals drooping off her nose, Martha arrogantly asks, ?Here's a question: Do they even know what's in the bills currently being considered by Congress?? I guess when you?re talking down to people, it?s hard to be anything but obnoxious.
You dummy, that?s the whole point. Average Americans don?t want a 1200 page bill full of gobblygook and indecipherable legalisms rammed down their throat. That why they are angry. Have you forgotten that it was your beloved Obama administration that pushed to have this paper monster become law before members of Congress had time to read it, much less understand the fine print. What happen to the exalted campaign promise of posting legislation on the Internet and giving people a reasonable amount time to understand the details?
And I don?t want to even mention that ridiculous second story about health care in France, except to point out that you must be in the country LEGALLY to receive all those alleged glorious benefits. Obama Care will grant free health care to well over 12 MILLION illegal aliens in this country. That?s 12 million of our hard working American senior citizens that will have to settle for counseling instead of the heath care they deserve.
My question is: ?What Does Martha Teichner Know About Health Reform?"

[Ferrell-2]

If this health reform bill was put to the public vote as a proposition, like some states use, it would fail. Our federal government doesn't use that process so we voters have only our letters and e-mails to our elected representatives to voice our wishes. Problem is, our elected officials tend to vote along party lines and the majority party usually wins out. Having said that, I now see this bill passing and I, nor anyone else, have the slightest clue how we are going to pay for it. We do know that some grants and benefits now emanating from Washington will surely be cut or drastically reduced. I'm afraid Medicare tops that list.

[rleb2002]

How soon they the "DEMOCRATS " are GIVING UP" to the Exploiters on the health insurance industries and their interest, Those which are crying, because they think will lose their. MONY TREE, (HEALT INSURANCE COMPANIES , AND PHARMACEUTICAL, MONOPOLIES) they fell tin risk to lose the way they have been ABUSING , assaulting and robing, o defrauding the AMERICAN PEOPLE-SO DEMOCRATS ARE BENDING THEIR KNES! TO WALL STREE!! AND MAKING THEMSELVES , PART OF THAT DIRTY GAME!!
(Leaving millions of Americans without a way to have good health, and if they get a sickness, they will get in bankruptcy, IS THT THE AMERICAN DREAM?? < only a few have the right to be rich and healthy, (they are saying, you the sick, have to be in misery, and in bankrupcy. Providing a Public Health Care option to compete with existing private insurance companies was a Democratic compromise versus a single payer Public Health Care System. There is no question that the real reason that the public option is loosing support is because our congressmen and senators are receiving large political contributions from the health insurance industry to buy their votes

[lowild]

I see this town hall backlash as hype inspired by fear. How to engage people and shift their thinking: fear. A lot of this drama is based around things that can be proven as pure hogwash, like death panels. Let's focus on the realities and get this spun back to the positives. This just cannot be a party-driven initiative.

[atexski]

I can't imagine why I was surprised that you did not balance your report of the healthcare debate with at LEAST one "professional" who opposes Obamacare. Instead, you mislead viewers to believe that only "angry" citizens who don't know what's in the bill oppose it. On the contrary, many "average" Americans know more of what's in the legislation than some members of Congress. Surely you could have found one "erudite" person who could delineate WHY it is American's oppose this bill.
An attempt at balanced reporting might help the cliff dive of your ratings.

[jlpnsx]

It?s interesting that everyone has an opinion but little in the way of facts to back up their claim. Yeah, old people are only worried about themselves. Sure. Of course in the end with any luck all of us will be old someday. In philosophy class they called these arguments ?fallacious argument?. If you can defeat an argument with facts and logic, attack to individual or group making the argument. I would guess that if we really stop and look deep inside as to what our motives are we may all learn something about ourselves that we may not like. At least if we are truly honest.

How can anyone truly assess this bill. I have attempted to read through it. I?m amazed at the claims and counter claims that keep bubbling up. We want to overhaul 20+% of our economy and yet no one wants to really dig into what?s included in this deal. A significant risk in my mind. Would you buy a house or a piece of property in Florida without first understanding exactly what you were buying. I would say no. Billions of dollars on the line, massive dept into the future as far as the eye can see, a Federal government that has never operated any well or efficiently (someone needs to point me to anything the government has operated smoothly and efficiently). This is the same government that screwed up after Katrina soooo badly and somehow we want to hand over our Healthcare system completely over to them. Social Security going underwater, Medicaid and Medicare underfunded and going under water inside the next 20 years or so and we want to give the Federal government even more.

Someone once said, ?the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result?.

Of, that?s right. This is all going to be free to me and the bill will be paid by someone else. No problem then.

[daisyjingles]

Senator Grassley from Iowa is telling us to "fear" the health care reform measures, such as the end of like counselling. Doesn't that sound familiar? "Be afraid, be very afraid" is the garbage Cheney used to get ahead.

Grassley is an embarrasment to Iowa.

[Hosheen]

How sad that the most vocal and obstreperous opponents know the least about the subject. The fact is, we have plenty of government-funded health care in the USA now. Medicare, VA, and others. Does it compete successfully with private insurance? Make me laugh! What government program ever did successfully compete with private enterprise? The problem is, private medical insurers don't want ANY competition.

Are you afraid that a government plan would have bureaucrats making medical decisions and arbitrarily stopping benefits? Isn't that what HMOs and private insurers do now? And they cannot be influenced by the ballot box. They only answer to the profit margin.

As for "socialized medicine" how many even really know what that is? Can you choose your doctor, have a say in your treatment, and change plans if you choose? If you can do any of the three, then that is NOT "socialized medicine". Mostly, that's a scare phrase people have been trained to fear and now is used to demonize anything that threatens the gravy train medical care in the USA has been for a few.

Educate yourselves and learn some facts and then think for yourselves. I know it's hard at first, but it will be worth it.

[Hosheen]

It's all a moot point anyway. Congress will make a mess of this just like they do everything else. Maybe if they were required to use the plan themselves? Even better, if they were required to pay into and live on Social Security instead of the sweetheart deal they voted them selves? But noooo, that would make sense.

[EDSAndy]

Hey CBS, thanks for ANOTHER in a long line of one-sided views on the Health Care "debate" or whatever the Liberal idea du jour is.

BTW, how about you report something about Pres. Obama's bald-faced lie about doctors and their supposed 40/50k reimbursement for amputation. Why don't you check with the American College of Surgeons at http://www.facs.org/news/obama081209.html and then report on that?

Oops, then again, that would put a liberal position in a bad light, can't have that.

[andylance1]

The present Democratic leadership in the House and Senate is utterly incompetent and the GOP isn't any better. The aftermath of the presidential campaign and cultural wars of last year magnified partisanship to the nth degree.

Both parties feel they have a lot of old scores to settle and to compromise is a political sin. Lack of party loyalty is considered treason by the leadership.

The arrogant way Pelosi handled the climate change bill caused irreparable damage to cooperation and collegiality in Congress. The largely pro-Democratic media simply magnified and exacerbated the acrimony between the parties. Washington is completely dysfunctional due to the lack of term limits and partisanship.

[Blank_tatoo]

Thank you CBS for showing the facts.
Some of the cluster fox watchers don't know they are hypnotized- does any hypnotized person know it?
Rupert is Australian. That cluster fox station needs to be investigated by strong journalists. Take on that fight. Render the anti-American far "right" gorrilas irrelavent.
Thanks.

[gmcajun]

On CBS this morning, and often, we hear tha the US healt care cost more per person than any other coutry in the world. Well we are the only county that provides free health care to illegal aliens. In Canada you have to reside there and have a job for 2 years before you can get health care. Try and go to Mexico and ask for health care as an American citizen. Aint going to happen. We need to stop providing free health care to all illegal immigants immediately, because that is running up the cost of our insurance. Let them go back to their county for health care or
have them pay....no more free health care.

[bradfregger]

I love this program and that is why I am so disappointed that the report on health care reform was so one sided. I had hoped, the Charles Osgood would make sure that the report was "fair and balanced." I guess I was hoping for too much.

[robham777]

Not one country. Not a few countries. EVERY COUNTRY ON PLANET EARTH is getting health insurance for ALL their citizens at HALF the cost of our largely privatized insurance system. It's obvious to anyone with eyes to see that we need to go overseas to look at those solutions, before we drown ourselves in debt.

So the countries in Africa who have received enormous amounts of aid from the U.S. under previous administrations have superior health care at half the cost. Sorry about the median/mean slip up, but obviously you understand that three countries in the data set spend $100 and one of the countries spends $1000 that the average is skewed by the countries that spend less.

[robham777]

As crazy as it may sound, many would rather die than support a national health insurance option that has been brought to the table by the President. I live among several of these kinds of people and they freely admit it.


Damn I never knew that Bill was black! If ever there was an issue that transcended race, this may be it. Of course there are many who would argue that the bulk of the uncovered in this country are minorities, but statistically I doubt this is true. What is really at stake is much more important, it is the well being of our spouses, children, parents, family members, and neighbors.

[gcstone]

There are all kinds of "issues" in the health care issue before the American public. The right wing is in turmoil and a public option for health insurance is the manifestation of a much deeper problem or problems. First, everyone understands that an extreme right wing exists in this country which is based in a hatred of African Americans and Jews. If you don't believe that, simply call up the American Nazi Party website and you will see their agenda. Now, in addition to the American Nazi Party there are some 900 other extremist right wing organizations in this country, i.e., the American White People's Party, KKK, etc. etc. Call up their websites. Some of these people are dangerous, i.e., Timothy McVeigh, etc. They will kill you, and they hate President Obama, and oppose anything that he does, period. That doesn't mean, however, that everyone who opposes a national health insurance option is an extreme right winger. There are others.

Second, the Republican and Democrat Parties both have elements of right wing racists in them. These people hate African Americans, but are not so willing to join the American Nazi Party, American White People's Party, KKK, etc. They are, however, having a very difficult time remaining with either the Republican and Democrat Parties, although it's difficult for them to leave the party of their parents and grandparents. Nevertheless, their hatred of African Americans causes them to oppose anything that President Obama proposes. As crazy as it may sound, many would rather die than support a national health insurance option that has been brought to the table by the President. I live among several of these kinds of people and they freely admit it.

Third, are the ultra-conservatives, many of whom couldn't care less about the racial thing; it's purely the love of money that drives this group. These are people such as Richard Armey (R-Tex) a former House majority leader, who heads up FreedomWorks and who enjoys the financial backing of such corporations as MetLIfe and Philip Morris. Then, we have the Scaife family. The Scaife family is an ultra conservative (by their own admission) family who has enormous wealth and who do everything they can to protect it. (If there ever was a person Christ would have had in mind when he said "It's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a wealthy man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven!" it is the Scaife family.) All you have to do is to ask them, they'll tell you that it's true. The Scaife's have several different foundations from which they dispense money to support their ultra conservative causes.

Those are only a few of the third group. The people who own Fox News and many of the right wing radio stations, for example, are in this third group. They own Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and the right wing journalists--by own them I mean they pay their salaries and provide them an opportunity to propagandize their owners' political-economic philosophy. Allow me a brief aside here.

The national health insurance option "debate" has been a very healthy debate for the Republic. It's causing right wingers in the Republican Party and the Democrat Party some real grief. Moderate to liberal members of both parties will likely end up controlling their respective parties, although the Republicans may well be in the minority for some time. The Republican Party, headed up by Newt Gingrich in the early 90s, is still saying how proud they were to defeat national health insurance policy that Hillary was proposing. Now, we're told today that some 20,000 people die each year because they don't have health insurance. How many years has it been since Newt and his Republican colleagues proudly killed Hillary's efforts. Well, multiply 20,000 by 16 (16 years ago) and you'll come up with the number of Americans--men, women, and children--who have died needlessly of a society that turned its back on them. The Republicans, I understand, are having a difficult time explaining why they're proud to have accomplished that feat.

The right wingers in both parties may well end up looking for a respectable third party. They don't want to join the extreme right wing political parties in this country, but they do not feel at home in either of the two major parties. I rather expect they will go to the Libertarian Party. The name "Libertarian" contains the respectable security of patriotic America as well as the respectable security of the pure American economic theory of 18th century, capitalism. The objective for them, of course, is to control the people and to protect their personal, family wealth. If the national health insurance option is lost, then think about it, you know what THEY have won, but what have YOU won? Are YOU listening to these people tell YOU how to vote? If you are, then their strategy has worked, and they're laughing through their drinks at you!

[gcstone]

There are all kinds of "issues" in the health care issue before the American public. The right wing is in turmoil and a public option for health insurance is the manifestation of a much deeper problem or problems. First, everyone understands that an extreme right wing exists in this country which is based in a hatred of African Americans and Jews. If you don't believe that, simply call up the American Nazi Party website and you will see their agenda. Now, in addition to the American Nazi Party there are some 900 other extremist right wing organizations in this country, i.e., the American White People's Party, KKK, etc. etc. Call up their websites. Some of these people are dangerous, i.e., Timothy McVeigh, etc. They will kill you, and they hate President Obama, and oppose anything that he does, period. That doesn't mean, however, that everyone who opposes a national health insurance option is an extreme right winger. There are others.

Second, the Republican and Democrat Parties both have elements of right wing racists in them. These people hate African Americans, but are not so willing to join the American Nazi Party, American White People's Party, KKK, etc. They are, however, having a very difficult time remaining with either the Republican and Democrat Parties, although it's difficult for them to leave the party of their parents and grandparents. Nevertheless, their hatred of African Americans causes them to oppose anything that President Obama proposes. As crazy as it may sound, many would rather die than support a national health insurance option that has been brought to the table by the President. I live among several of these kinds of people and they freely admit it.

Third, are the ultra-conservatives, many of whom couldn't care less about the racial thing; it's purely the love of money that drives this group. These are people such as Richard Armey (R-Tex) a former House majority leader, who heads up FreedomWorks and who enjoys the financial backing of such corporations as MetLIfe and Philip Morris. Then, we have the Scaife family. The Scaife family is an ultra conservative (by their own admission) family who has enormous wealth and who do everything they can to protect it. (If there ever was a person Christ would have had in mind when he said "It's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a wealthy man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven!" it is the Scaife family.) All you have to do is to ask them, they'll tell you that it's true. The Scaife's have several different foundations from which they dispense money to support their ultra conservative causes.

Those are only a few of the third group. The people who own Fox News and many of the right wing radio stations, for example, are in this third group. They own Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and the right wing journalists--by own them I mean they pay their salaries and provide them an opportunity to propagandize their owners' political-economic philosophy. Allow me a brief aside here.

The national health insurance option "debate" has been a very healthy debate for the Republic. It's causing right wingers in the Republican Party and the Democrat Party some real grief. Moderate to liberal members of both parties will likely end up controlling their respective parties, although the Republicans may well be in the minority for some time. The Republican Party, headed up by Newt Gingrich in the early 90s, is still saying how proud they were to defeat national health insurance policy that Hillary was proposing. Now, we're told today that some 20,000 people die each year because they don't have health insurance. How many years has it been since Newt and his Republican colleagues proudly killed Hillary's efforts. Well, multiply 20,000 by 16 (16 years ago) and you'll come up with the number of Americans--men, women, and children--who have died needlessly of a society that turned its back on them. The Republicans, I understand, are having a difficult time explaining why they're proud to have accomplished that feat.

The right wingers in both parties may well end up looking for a respectable third party. They don't want to join the extreme right wing political parties in this country, but they do not feel at home in either of the two major parties. I rather expect they will go to the Libertarian Party. The name "Libertarian" contains the respectable security of patriotic America as well as the respectable security of the pure American economic theory of 18th century, capitalism. The objective for them, of course, is to control the people and to protect their personal, family wealth. If the national health insurance option is lost, then think about it, you know what THEY have won, but what have YOU won? Are YOU listening to these people tell YOU how to vote? If you are, then their strategy has worked, and they're laughing through their drinks at you!

[robham777]

by ubrew12 August 16, 2009 7:28 PM EDT
Americans would save a TRILLION DOLLARS EVERY YEAR if they just switched to the healthcare practiced in every one of our capitalist trading partners for decades: single payer universal healthcare. Our healthcare costs are $2.2 trillion a year, and we pay TWICE as much per person as the OECD average.

Yes we may pay twice as much as the average in dollars spent but the fact that government expenditures already account for about half of this difference, and the fact that you are talking about average and not mean it is not a foregone conclusion that we can replicate these savings in the U.S. When you factor in the additional administrative cost to the federal government ( fed employees receive fantastic benefits packages compared to private employees) , I think it may become very hard to make the cost of doing nothing argument.

[ubrew12]

That doesn't change the fact that they pay half as much for the same healthcare that we get. The difference is startling, and exists for every country we compare ourselves to. Hence, it is NOT an anomaly. Its suggests not only that we are doing something VERY WRONG in this country, but that other countries manage to get it RIGHT... ROUTINELY. There isn't just SOME countries that do it cheaper than we do it, ALL COUNTRIES insure their populations for HALF the cost (or LESS than half the cost) of OUR system.

Your attempt to dissemble the argument by claiming that gov't is half the difference, that 'average' is different from 'mean' (and what the h*ll is THAT about? Do you mean 'median'?) and fed benefits costs really amounts to alot of misdirection, if you ask me.

Not one country. Not a few countries. EVERY COUNTRY ON PLANET EARTH is getting health insurance for ALL their citizens at HALF the cost of our largely privatized insurance system. It's obvious to anyone with eyes to see that we need to go overseas to look at those solutions, before we drown ourselves in debt.

[taxchurches]

Dissent is good. What isn't good is blind, stupid, uninformed opposition. Here's what going to happen. The mouthy few are going to kill the public option, even though they don't know what it is or what it means (they can't possibly know, because it hasn't been defined). But they aren't going to kill the mandate, which means that 50 million people who can't afford health insurance already are going to be forced by law to buy it anyway. Also, another fun thing that is going to happen, is once they defeat the healthcare bill, healthcare costs in this country are going to absolutely skyrocket, because of the fluctuation and uncertainty in the Big Pharma markets and the private sector medical field. So thanks for that, and enjoy.