Carol Shea-Porter called it "Medicare for All" during her campaign to
represent the First Congressional District of New Hampshire in
Washington. Contrary to all the pundits' expectations, 52 % of the
Districts voters decided that they wanted her representation. No
doubt, her position on adequate, accessible medical care was a
deciding factor.

But, unlike other states which are well on the way towards setting up
state-wide systems, New Hampshire has done little but address the
problem on the fringes, making it somewhat more affordable for
business to provide health insurance as an employment benefit.
Indeed, one of our Senators, John Sununu, just recently advised the
business community not to waste time on the issue. He thinks health
care is expensive because "it's worth it."

We disagree. Which is why our Democracy for America group is
proposing to hold a series of public forums, modeled on our candidate
forums, to discuss the pros and cons of a comprehensive revision of
how we deliver medical services to all people.

To prepare ourselves to ask the right questions of the experts we hope
to invite to our forums, there are a couple of resources we can access
right now. California OneCare has put together a video presentation
of the grass-roots proposal that's being considered there. You can
watch it on YouTube or go to their web site to see how their campaign
is organized.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=jB0Vn_BppwM

Closer to home, there's Mass-Care, the Massachusetts answer to
covering everyone in the state. One of the selling points for
business is that, like Canada with it's universal coverage program,
states that take over the responsibility for the health and welfare of
their people will be more attractive to new business for whom the cost
of health insurance is becoming increasingly onerous.

The most concise and comprehensive analysis of the effect of a
single-payer plan I've come across is the one prepared by John R.
Battista, M.D. about the Connecticut Health Care Security Act

F.A.Q. About The Connecticut Health Care Security Act


which addresses such questions as:

What problems of our current health care system would be solved by the
Connecticut Health Care Security Act?

How is it possible for the single payer, universal health care system
proposed by this Act to expand benefits yet save money? What data do
you have to support this claim?

How would the proposed health care insurance system be paid for?

It is often stated that the United States has the best health care
system in the world.
Wouldn't quality of health care decrease in Connecticut under this
Act?

and fifteen others.
http://cthealth.server101.com/ct_single_payer_faq.htm
The Connecticult Coalition for Universal Health Care provides
frequently updated information as well, including a new animated video
about the Pirates of the Health Care-ibbean featuring the Austin
Lounge Lizards

http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/healthcare/healthcarepirates/
******************************************************************************************************

If you check out the California OneCare video, I'm sure you'll find
the personal stories very persuasive. Nobody should have to endure
what these people are going through, in addition to being sick, but
first-hand accounts are invaluable in telling us where the current
system is going wrong. So, in addition to our forums featuring
experts, I'd hope we'd invite some beneficiaries of the medical
profession to share their stories with us. (There's a reason why
they're called patients. It takes a lot of patience to negotiate the
hurdles.)

Oddly enough, there are a couple of areas that aren't being covered.
State programs, of course, focus on their own population. So, its
understandable that they're not particularly concerned about meshing
with other state. But, the fact is that people often need medical
care when they're on the road, whether for work or on vacation,
making, if not a national system, at least one that's linked with
other jurisdictions, really important.

Perhaps the thinking is that since the majority of emergency
situations are car-related, that's a category that doesn't need to be
addressed. And yet, if the program is truly universal, wouldn't that
mean that the medical component of car insurance could be done away
with entirely? Ditto for medical workmen's compensation premiums
which are such a burden on small business? Truly, the amount of
paperwork we would be able to eliminate seems astronomic.

Finally, although the CareOne video makes the point that in a
well-functioning community we all contribute to lessen the effects of
the hazards, whether from injury, disease of natural catastrophes, to
which we are all prone, there's no mention of the fact that the
benefit to the whole community is often much greater than it is to the
individual who's rescued. That's because our intervention prevents the
negative effects from spreading. And if the whole community benefits,
it seems only fair that the whole community should pay.