Initial attempts to sign up for ObamaCare go about as well as expected

[boutons_deux]

healthcare.gov is WORSE than Katrina? Jon Stewart differs

WATCH: Jon Stewart Destroys All Katrina/Healthcare.gov Comparisons Forever

http://www.nationalmemo.com/watch-jon-stewart-destroys-all-katrinahealthcare-gov-comparisons-forever/

[boutons_deux]

REMINDER: Obamacare Is Still Much More Popular Than The GOP

There’s not much good news for President Obama and his signature legislative achievement in the ABC/Washington Post poll released Tuesday morning.

Only 33 percent approve of the way the law is being implemented, with 63 percent disapproving. The 40 percent approving of the law itself is just 2 points shy of the president’s 42 percent approval rating, just as the 57 percent who disapprove of the law is just 2 percent higher than the 55 percent who disapprove of President Obama.

Less than 50 percent polled said the president was a strong leader, trustworthy, understanding or a strong manager. The only good news is that a majority of Americans, 52 percent, believe that the president said what he believed was true when he promised that people who like their insurance plans can keep them.

“The administration’s rollout of the law was an epic, unforgivable failure, so it’s not surprising public disapproval is skyrocketing,” writes The Washington Post‘s Greg Sargent. “That’s as it should be.”
This leads to a pretty simple conclusion: President Obama’s popularity is dependent on Healthcare.gov beginning to work well and America finding that there are more “winners” than “losers” under the law.

However, it’s important to remember that when it comes to unpopularity, the Affordable Care Act ain’t got nothin’ on the Republican Party.



Huffington Post‘s Pollster has the GOP’s average approval at 27.7 percent with 59.5 percent disapproving, which may explain the key finding of a new United Technologies/National Journal Congressional Connection Poll, also released Tuesday.


Though the Republican Study Committee has outlined an Obamacare alternative and conservatives are increasingly discussing what a conservative plan might look like, House Republicans have never offered to replace the law with an alternative, even as they’ve voted to repeal it over three dozen times.

http://www.nationalmemo.com/reminder...-than-the-gop/

[SA210]

[SA210]

[SA210]

[Nbadan]

This does not fit into the current news narrative of repeating a right wing talking point along with an old picture of President Obama frowning, then commenting that the ACA will hurt Democrat's chances in 2014. Yup, this is what is reported as news, the same right wing talking points you have heard 24/7 by the MSM....

"Health care spending increases hit new low"

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...rowth/3650243/

WASHINGTON — Buoyed by a report showing that health care spending has risen by the lowest rate ever recorded, White House officials said Wednesday a continuation of the trend could lead to more jobs and lower-than-expected costs.

Reduced health care costs for employers could lead to 200,000 to 400,000 new jobs per year by the second half of the decade, said Jason Furman, the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers.

"If just half the recent slowdown in spending can be sustained, health care spending a decade from now will be $1,400 per person lower," Furman said.

The Council of Economic Advisers report released Wednesday also said health care inflation is the lowest it has been in 50 years.

[Nbadan]

Healthcare plan enrollment surges in some states after rocky rollout

A number of states that use their own systems, including California, are on track to hit enrollment targets for 2014 because of a sharp increase in November, according to state officials.

"What we are seeing is incredible momentum," said Peter Lee, director of Covered California, the nation's largest state insurance marketplace, which accounted for a third of all enrollments nationally in October. California — which enrolled about 31,000 people in health plans last month — nearly doubled that in the first two weeks of this month.

Several other states, including Connecticut and Kentucky, are outpacing their enrollment estimates, even as states that depend on the federal website lag far behind. In Minnesota, enrollment in the second half of October ran at triple the rate of the first half, officials said. Washington state is also on track to easily exceed its October enrollment figure, officials said.

The growing enrollment in those states is a rare bit of good news for backers of the Affordable Care Act and suggests that the serious problems with the law's rollout may not be fatal, despite critics' renewed calls for repeal.

Read more: http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1.../p2p-78240693/

[Nbadan]

Why Republicans Suddenly Care About Canceled Health Policies
Posted on Nov 15, 2013
By Joe Conason

Amid the current national uproar over the troubles of the Affordable Care Act, it is almost uplifting to hear the deep concern expressed by politicians, pundits, lobbyists and corporate leaders over cancellation of existing health insurance policies. They empathize loudly with the millions of potential victims, whose plight infuriates these worthy observers with fury. They fill hours of television and pages of print with expressions of outrage. Suddenly, everyone in Washington is intensely concerned about Americans losing their health coverage.

The outpouring of noble sentiment would be laudable—indeed, long overdue—if only there were reason to believe these protestations are sincere. Sadly, the evidence points in the opposite direction, for a single obvious reason: Millions of people in this country have been losing health insurance for years, resulting in many thousands of serious illnesses, bankruptcies and early deaths. But until insurance cancellations became a political embarrassment for President Barack Obama, the usual right-wing reaction was silence. (Except for that awkward and revealing outburst during the 2012 Republican debates when a live audience howled its approval for the “let him die” plan.)

For anyone who has ever honestly cared about people losing their health coverage—for instance, Obama or his Democratic predecessor, former President Bill Clinton—the depressing statistical reality has long been plain. Every day, thousands of Americans leave the rolls of the private insurance industry, almost never voluntarily.

People often forfeit insurance after losing a job, which happened to millions during the Great Recession. At its height, when tea party Republicans were fighting to kill Obamacare in the cradle, more than 44,000 people were losing their health coverage every week. In May 2009, the policy journal Health Affairs published a projection that nearly 7 million Americans would lose coverage by the end of 2010.

CONTINUED:

http://www.truthdig.com/report

[George Gervin's Afro]

so things are getting better...shocking

[boutons_deux]

G.O.P. Maps Out Waves of Attacks Over Health Law

The memo distributed to House Republicans this week was concise and blunt, listing talking points and marching orders:

“Because of Obamacare, I Lost My Insurance.”

“Obamacare Increases Health Care Costs.”

“The Exchanges May Not Be Secure, Putting Personal Information at Risk.”

“Continue Collecting Cons uent Stories.”

they intend to keep Democrats on their heels through a multilayered, sequenced assault.

these stories are creating themselves.”

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/11/21...?from=homepage

All LIES, PROPAGANDA, MISINFORMATION, ANECDOTES cherry-picked from the overall postive picture than ACA has always planned to be, and will become.

Poor, ignorant, rural red-state VICTIMS of their Repug politicians will regret, if they are smart enough, being denied Medicaid and health insurance.

[boutons_deux]

Worse yet, the ACA contained zero funding for the development and implementation of the site, and there's no way the congressional Republicans would ever authorize more money for it. It's unclear why the federal exchange was unfunded in the law, but one thing's for sure, a House of Representatives that voted 46 times to totally repeal the law wouldn't have coughed up a dime to rectify the oversight.So, what happened?

A cash-starved Healthcare.gov development process, which precipitated serious glitches when October 1 rolled around -- problems that should never have occurred.And those glitches might've been exacerbated when right-wing hacktivists reportedly conducted "denial of service" attacks against Healthcare.gov -- deliberate attempts to overwhelm the website's servers. CNN reported on Monday:

Hackers have attempted more than a dozen cyber attacks against the Obamacare website, according to a top Homeland Security Department official. The attacks, which are under investigation, failed, said the official.Authorities also are investigating a separate report of a tool designed to put heavy strain on HealthCare.gov through a so-called distributed denial of service. It does not appear to have been activated.

Sabotaging the Medicaid Expansion

Americans for Prosperity, funded by Charles and David Koch, launched advertising campaigns to strong-arm state lawmakers to block the expansion Medicaid in Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Ohio, Louisiana, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Once again, in the 26 states that blocked the Medicaid expansion, we're left with five to eight million people who are consequently unable to afford exchange policies but who also make too much money to qualify for Medicaid.In Alaska yesterday, Governor Sean Parnell, a Republican, obviously, rejected the Medicaid expansion thus denying health insurance to 40,000 Alaskans. Parnell said, "I believe a costly Medicaid expansion especially on top of the broken Obamacare system is a hot mess."That's a lie. Fact: the federal government pays the entire cost of the Medicaid expansion for 2014 through 2016. The states pay nothing. So it's not costly at all. In fact, it's free for the first three years.What happens when the expansion is blocked throughout more than half the nation? Potentially millions of pissed-off working class Americans due to what's perceived as punitively expensive Obamacare premiums -- premiums that are only too expensive because Republican governors blocked the Medicaid expansion.

Sabotaging ACA Marketplace Enrollment

Speaking of the Koch brothers and Alaska, a group called Foundation for Government Accountability launched a campaign to convince Alaskans to deliberately not buy insurance policies in order to undermine ACA enrollment goals, and, naturally, to express their self-defeating hatred of President Obama. Smart.A pair of websites, along with accompanying Facebook pages, were launched back in September: dontenrollalaska.org and knowthefactsalaska.org. And go figure:

Based in Naples, Fla., the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA) is a 501(c)3 non-profit that "promotes public policies that achieve limited, cons utional government and a robust economy that will be an engine for job creation across the states." One of the foundation's directors is Robert Levy, the chairman of the board of the Cato Ins ute, the Washington, D.C. think tank with a long and complicated relationship with the Koch brothers.

Yep. All roads lead back to the Kochs.

There's something especially visceral and sinister about well-protected billionaires telling middle class Americans to go without health insurance in order to, you know, kick Obama in nuts.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/the-massive-republican-ca_b_4311424.html

[TSA]

If people think the cancellations are bad now what will happen when millions more are cancelled by small businesses forcing them on the exchange

[boutons_deux]

If people think the cancellations are bad now what will happen when millions more are cancelled by small businesses forcing them on the exchange

who says?

your right-wing buddy CC seems pretty happy sending his people to exchange, and that's in fricking TX.

[boutons_deux]

Brownback (Kansas) Turns Medicaid Over to Private Companies.. and these are the results

Today, Pitch Magazine, a Kansas City alternative newspaper released a scathing, on point analysis of Kansas "KanCare" debacle.

Since learning of his condition in college, Bullers has slowly lost control of his body. But his mind remains clear. These days, the former Kansas City Star reporter spends his days hounding a bureaucracy in Topeka in an attempt to keep in-home nurses all day, every day. This past January, the state transferred the care of 380,000 Medicaid recipients to three private companies as part of a program called KanCare.Gov. Sam Brownback has said the wholesale privatization of Medicaid under KanCare was meant to save $1 billion over five years. He also promised that the move wouldn't sacrifice Kansans' level of care, and the number of people on Medicaid's waiting list would be reduced.

But the only way for the three managed-care organizations to realize cost savings on clients with permanent physical disabilities, like Bullers, is by cutting Medicaid services. Bullers' 24/7 care was slated to be reduced by November 1 to 40 hours per week. Caregivers, who now work in three eight-hour shifts, could visit him only on weekdays for eight hours a day, or all seven days of the week for five hours each.

"To me, that's an Orwellian cluster ," Bullers tells The Pitch. "How can you take out that chunk of money on the backs of the most vulnerable and say with a straight face that you're going to improve services? It defies common sense."

http://www.pitch.com/...

The Pitch of course does all of the leg work in a multi-page piece that deserves to be read. Because it highlights what is wrong with using a for-profit motive when dispensing need to those who are amongst the most vulnerable.

It isn't as though Kansas couldn't see it coming:

Steve Rose

Star columnistThe Kansas Health Ins ute has nailed it.

KanCare – to paraphrase – is likely to be a mess when it is implemented on Jan. 1.

On that date 380,000 poor and disabled Kansans, who now receive services through Medicaid, will be shifted to private, managed care in an attempt to save money. The new program is called KanCare.

The KHI researched what has happened in Kentucky, which recently has implemented what we are about to implement. And, so far, it has had lots of hiccups.
And Kentucky did not even include three categories that are included in the Kansas plan: long-term services for the elderly, physically disabled and, eventually, the developmentally disabled.

http://joco913.com/...

Pitch lays out the truth in page after page..

Medicaid is a health program for low-income Americans that's funded jointly by states and the federal government. Several states have transferred segments of their Medicaid programs to private insurers to curb rising costs.

While other states have dipped their toes into the privatization of Medicaid, Kansas has cannonballed into the deep end by shifting all of its Medicaid management to three private companies."It is the most extensive in the nation," says Gary Blumenthal, a former Kansas legislator who is now CEO of the Association of Developmental Disabilities Providers in suburban Boston and a member of the federal National Council on Disability. "Other states have viewed managed care as an area to move slowly and cautiously in the use of managed care, to determine if the use of managed care can produce the savings that advocates claim can occur while preserving the quality and safety for people that it would be serving."

Brownback has made every effort to twist the truth and portray this story one way.. when it is far different than that.

"The process has not gone as smoothly as the people at the Statehouse would have you believe, as far as the implementation is concerned," said Allen Van Driel, CEO of Smith County Memorial Hospital in north-central Kansas, according to a September 23 Kansas Health Ins ute News Service report. "The party line is that the managed-care plans are working and that KanCare is a huge success, that it's processing claims and all that. But that's simply not factual."

This is a powerful piece that needs to be read by more people. What it doesn't touch on, though is the falseness of this dilemma altogether. Those like Brownback assert that there simply isn't enough money to support all those who are sick and disabled, therefore they must cut costs. What isn't be said is that there is another alternative to continuous cutting of costs.. it's called increasing revenues.

Brownback and others hate that - cut, cut cut is the only way. But in the end, part of the social responsibility has to be the fact that we care for those who need it most. This means that we count on companies not getting over the top tax breaks, we ask that people carry their weight and we provide for our population.But that kind of talk makes people unhappy. Too bad, because tonight here in KC there are a lot of people on a wait list that is now 7+ years long who won't get services because the continuous cuts to healthcare in Kansas.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/1...s?detail=email

Repugs are clinical sociopaths. goddam these assholes.

[boutons_deux]

All the Details of the GOP's Health Care Game Plan


here's a reason why NFL coaches guard their playbooks the way that the warrant officer guards the nuclear "football" briefcase wherever the president goes. If you have an effective strategy, you spring it by surprise. You don't throw it across the pages of, say, the New York Times. You spring it as a surprise. Maybe the Republicans are smarter than I think they are, but this move seems very much like a well-developed bluff.

The effort has its roots in a strategy developed last spring, when House Republican leaders - plagued by party divisions that were thwarting legislative accomplishments - refocused the House's committees on oversight rather than on the development of new policies. Rob Borden, a general counsel to Representative Darrell Issa of California, the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, moved to a newly created position that reported jointly to Speaker John A. Boehner and Representative Eric Cantor of Virginia, the majority leader. Mr. Borden's task was to coordinate and monitor oversight activities across separate committees to make sure they are not overlapping or undercutting one another. That aggressive campaign, which produced numerous hearings on the attacks in Benghazi, Libya, as well as on I.R.S. scrutiny of conservative groups, is now increasingly consumed by the health care fight. House Republican leaders empowered four committees - oversight, Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce, and Education and the Workforce - to take the lead, with support from other panels, such as the Science and Homeland Security Committees, which have examined computer security.

(iow, Repugs priority is to up govt rather than govern)

The reason the probes into the IRS and into Benghazi, Benghazi!,BENGHAZI! came to nothing was not the lack of coordination between various committees in the Republican House. The reason the investigations flopped was that the scandals were both fake and Darrell Issa, a clownish hack who shouldn't be trusted with a butter knife. (It might have been nice if the Times, while donating several dozen column inches to the Republicans so they can lay out their battle plan, had acknowledged this, but never mind.)

Mr. Cantor and Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, another member of the Republican leadership, have also leaned on all 231 House Republicans. A 17-page "House Republican Playbook" walks members through "messaging tools" like talking points, social media tactics and "digital fliers"; details lines of attack; offers up a sample opinion article for local newspapers; and provides an extensive timeline on the health care law and an exhaustive list of legislative responses that have gone nowhere.

Page 15: Make Sure Gohmert Is Medicated.

A message of the week is presented to the Republican members at the beginning of each week, Ms. McMorris Rodgers said. A "Call to Action" email chain distributes relevant breaking news. A new website, gop.gov/yourstory, is collecting anecdotes from each member. The goal, according to Ms. McMorris Rodgers, is to use all the "Republican voices we have in the House, the media markets in all the districts we represent, to take our message all over the country." "It penetrates," she said. "It's powerful."

Contact your physician for an anecdote lasting four hours or more.

Republicans have gone to the floor of the House and the Senate to tell cons uent stories of soaring premiums or yawning new deductibles. But on Wednesday, the White House Council of Economic Advisers released a report showing that health care spending had grown by 1.3 percent since 2010, the year the health care law passed. That is the lowest rate on record for any three-year period and less than a third of the average since 1965, according to the White House.

Well, all right, then.

This may work. The American public has demonstrated a profound sweet-tooth for bull storytelling, and the Times has shown itself willing to run informercials for the new campaign. But, for me, this looks like wrapping your battle plan around some cigars and leaving them in a field for the other side to find. (Take that, Bateman!) In any case, it's certainly a full employment plan for fact-checkers.

Oh yeah, there's nothing in there about actually getting people health-care, either.

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politic...me-plan-112113

[AntiChrist]

Lol, people still defending this POS law.

[boutons_deux]

Lol, people still defending this POS law.

It's VASTLY more popular than tea baggers and Repugs

[TeyshaBlue]

It's VASTLY more popular than tea baggers and Repugs

Biting analysis.

Also more popular than Dems.

[TeyshaBlue]

http://www.people-press.org/2013/09/...ainty-persist/

And falling apparently.

[boutons_deux]

http://www.people-press.org/2013/09/...ainty-persist/

And falling apparently.

the naive sheeple get suckered and lied to by the Repug/ALEC/VRWC propaganda machine.

[boutons_deux]

STUDY: Nearly Three-Quarters Of Americans With Individual Plans Qualify For Obamacare Subsidies

Over 70 percent of Americans under age 65 who buy insurance through the individual market will either qualify for Obamacare subsidies or the health law’s expansion of Medicaid in the states that accept it, according to a new study by Families USA.

Obamacare provides insurance subsidies to Americans making up to 400 percent of the poverty level — about $94,200 for a family of four — who enroll in plans through the health law’s statewide marketplaces. The new study finds that 71 percent of current individual policyholders have annual incomes that fall below this threshold. Earlier estimates by groups like the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) estimated that just under half of these Americans could qualify for subsidies.

Families USA’s study also confirms earlier reports that the current individual market burdens consumers with uncertainty. For instance, a full “64.5 percent of consumers with individual market insurance kept that insurance for a year or less” irrespective of income, according to study authors. Many of these plans also skimp on the types of benefits that Americans actually need when they get sick, such as maternity, mental health, prescription drug, and even hospitalization coverage, while placing annual and lifetime caps on coverage. The health law has far more robust minimum coverage requirements, outlaws benefit caps, and doesn’t allow insurers to drop customers or raise their premiums based on health status.

Researchers also noted that just a fraction of a percent of all non-elderly Americans have individual plans that they keep for more than a year but won’t qualify for a government subsidy when they go out to buy new plans through the Obamacare marketplaces.

“[U]nder the ACA, only 0.6 percent of Americans under age 65 will be at risk of losing their current individual market plan and will not be income-eligible for financial assistance that will make their new insurance plan more affordable,” concluded the authors. “Even among this 0.6 percent, some have insurers who will not or cannot cancel their plans. Others will decide that they are better off with higher-value plans in the new insurance marketplaces.”

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013...are-subsidies/

[TeyshaBlue]

the naive sheeple get suckered and lied to by the Repug/ALEC/VRWC propaganda machine.

Lol..its Pew Research..

[boutons_deux]

the naive sheeple get suckered and lied to by the Repug/ALEC/VRWC propaganda machine.

healthcare.gov is NOT ACA ( see Romneycare, Repug Medicare Advantage startup problems, and Repugs blowing $1B on FBI system that never worked )

Fox/Repug disinformation and LIES about ACA are not ACA

Low-volume signups at startup is NOT ACA disaster ( see Romneycare startup PROBLEMS and ramp, and see where it is today )

ACA is going to be huge, open-ended success, just like MA Romneycare. Although Romneycare didn't have nation-wide Fox Repug round-the-clock LIES and Repug states sabotaging it, or even MA REpugs sabotaging(they actually helped their cons uents sign up).

[TeyshaBlue]

lol...there is no comparison to the scope and complexity of ACA to Romney's system. Your comparison is as laughably simplistic as your progressive echo chamber talking points.

[boutons_deux]

Costly complexity is baked into Obamacare. No health insurance system is without problems but Canadian style single-payer full Medicare for all is simple, affordable, comprehensive and universal.
In the early 1960s, President Lyndon Johnson enrolled 20 million elderly Americans into Medicare in six months. There were no websites. They did it with index cards!
Below please find 21 Ways the Canadian Health Care System is Better than Obamacare.

Repeal Obamacare and replace it with the much more efficient single-payer, everybody in, nobody out, free choice of doctor and hospital.

Love, Canada

Number 21:
In Canada, everyone is covered automatically at birth – everybody in, nobody out.
In the United States, under Obamacare, 31 million Americans will still be uninsured by 2023 and millions more will remain underinsured.

Number 20:
In Canada, the health system is designed to put people, not profits, first.
In the United States, Obamacare will do little to curb insurance industry profits and will actually enhance insurance industry profits.

Number 19:
In Canada, coverage is not tied to a job or dependent on your income – rich and poor are in the same system, the best guaranty of quality.
In the United States, under Obamacare, much still depends on your job or income. Lose your job or lose your income, and you might lose your existing health insurance or have to settle for lesser coverage.

Number 18:
In Canada, health care coverage stays with you for your entire life.
In the United States, under Obamacare, for tens of millions of Americans, health care coverage stays with you for as long as you can afford your share.

Number 17:
In Canada, you can freely choose your doctors and hospitals and keep them. There are no lists of “in-network” vendors and no extra hidden charges for going “out of network.”
In the United States, under Obamacare, the in-network list of places where you can get treated is shrinking – thus restricting freedom of choice – and if you want to go out of network, you pay for it.

Number 16:
In Canada, the health care system is funded by income, sales and corporate taxes that, combined, are much lower than what Americans pay in premiums.
In the United States, under Obamacare, for thousands of Americans, it’s pay or die – if you can’t pay, you die. That’s why many thousands will still die every year under Obamacare from lack of health insurance to get diagnosed and treated in time.

Number 15:
In Canada, there are no complex hospital or doctor bills. In fact, usually you don’t even see a bill.
In the United States, under Obamacare, hospital and doctor bills will still be terribly complex, making it impossible to discover the many costly overcharges.

Number 14:
In Canada, costs are controlled. Canada pays 10 percent of its GDP for its health care system, covering everyone.
In the United States, under Obamacare, costs continue to skyrocket. The U.S. currently pays 18 percent of its GDP and still doesn’t cover tens of millions of people.

Number 13:
In Canada, it is unheard of for anyone to go bankrupt due to health care costs.
In the United States, under Obamacare, health care driven bankruptcy will continue to plague Americans.

Number 12:
In Canada, simplicity leads to major savings in administrative costs and overhead.
In the United States, under Obamacare, complexity will lead to ratcheting up administrative costs and overhead.

Number 11:
In Canada, when you go to a doctor or hospital the first thing they ask you is: “What’s wrong?”
In the United States, the first thing they ask you is: “What kind of insurance do you have?”

Number 10:
In Canada, the government negotiates drug prices so they are more affordable.
In the United States, under Obamacare, Congress made it specifically illegal for the government to negotiate drug prices for volume purchases, so they remain unaffordable.

Number 9:
In Canada, the government health care funds are not profitably diverted to the top one percent.
In the United States, under Obamacare, health care funds will continue to flow to the top. In 2012, CEOs at six of the largest insurance companies in the U.S. received a total of $83.3 million in pay, plus benefits.

Number 8:
In Canada, there are no necessary co-pays or deductibles.
In the United States, under Obamacare, the deductibles and co-pays will continue to be unaffordable for many millions of Americans.

Number 7:
In Canada, the health care system contributes to social solidarity and national pride.
In the United States, Obamacare is divisive, with rich and poor in different systems and tens of millions left out or with sorely limited benefits.

Number 6:
In Canada, delays in health care are not due to the cost of insurance.
In the United States, under Obamacare, patients without health insurance or who are underinsured will continue to delay or forgo care and put their lives at risk.

Number 5:
In Canada, nobody dies due to lack of health insurance.
In the United States, under Obamacare, many thousands will continue to die every year due to lack of health insurance.

Number 4:
In Canada, an increasing majority supports their health care system, which costs half as much, per person, as in the United States. And in Canada, everyone is covered.
In the United States, a majority – many for different reasons – oppose Obamacare.

Number 3:
In Canada, the tax payments to fund the health care system are progressive – the lowest 20 percent pays 6 percent of income into the system while the highest 20 percent pays 8 percent.
In the United States, under Obamacare, the poor pay a larger share of their income for health care than the affluent.

Number 2:
In Canada, the administration of the system is simple. You get a health care card when you are born. And you swipe it when you go to a doctor or hospital. End of story.
In the United States, Obamacare’s 2,500 pages plus regulations (the Canadian Medicare Bill was 13 pages) is so complex that then Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said before passage “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.”

Number 1:
In Canada, the majority of citizens love their health care system.
In the United States, the majority of citizens, physicians, and nurses prefer the Canadian type system – single-payer, free choice of doctor and hospital , everybody in, nobody out.

For more information see Single Payer Action.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/11/22-1