« Ethical standards in Congress | Main | Where’s the good news? »

April 05, 2009

Americans want universal care

I appreciate The Star’s support of the State of Missouri changing the Medicaid eligibility standard (3/29, Opinion, “Better health care needed for the working poor”). I am outraged that a family of four with an annual income of $4,411 does not qualify for Medicaid! But the solution to America’s health care crisis lies with the federal government.

The article “Support grows for care cure; But rifts remain over a government insurance plan and how to pay for more health coverage” (3/29, A-8) indicated that a single-payer insurance system is “all but ruled out” of federal consideration. There is pressure from the insurance industry to squelch any kind of “public plan option.”

Rep. Roy Blunt’s aide was quoted: “A government-controlled plan available to every American will push 160 million Americans now in private plans into a one-size-fits-all bureaucratic plan.”

But Americans wouldn’t need to be pushed. If a program similar to traditional Medicare were available, we’d leave the nightmare of private health insurance in droves.

See Physicians for a National Health Program (www.PNHP.org) for thorough, easy-to-digest information on the merits of universal health insurance.

Mary Lindsay
Kansas City



The VA has a horrid track record. Allow veterans to go wherever they choose for health services.
Pub fails to tell you that a VA doctor can not be sued. Military physicians are free from liability, hence you could have had your license to practice revoked and still practice in the military.
Half of America wants something for nothing.
The term "universal Health care" means FREE or OPM to these entilement thinkers.

Smarter Than You

I love watching magic tricks; the sleight of hand where you can’t believe your eyes but you know logically that it IS a trick. So let’s talk about Jimmer’s continued defense of Siegfried and Obama’s health plan.

Jimbo insists it’s “just insurance.” Great. Now let’s apply some basic economic factors. There is already a shortage of medical professionals so adding thousands of additional patients will result in poorer coverage for the populace at large. You also run into that pesky inflationary thing when demand outstrips supply. Then most Americans get the joy of knowing they’re paying more for less. But I’m sure basic economic factors don’t matter at Team Obama.

Empirical proof? What’s the funding level like for Medicare and Medicaid? What is it compared to the projections when these programs were rolled out? If we can’t afford current entitlements what will more do to the long term economy?

Sorry to burst your bubble, Jimmy. You may now resume crackin’ corn.


“Since GCYL is a poli sci major at Penn Valley..”

What is this, another liberal arts major lashing out at the word?

“.. his experience with VA is a little bit limited. VA saved my life twice…”

My experience with VA was watching then nearly killing my brother, twice in his life time. See you and your beloved VA Hospitals in hell. Actually, for the VA Hospitals, I’m being redundant.


This article is why Americans cannot trust the media. Where in the world did you get your numbers? Are you aware of the minumum wage in Missouri. Even if the working family of four was working for minimum wage if they WORKED 40 hours a week like most people they would be making well over 10,000 a year. Maybe you and I have different connontations for the word WORK. There are too many people taking advantage of the system. Even as a senior in high school I made more than 4,000 dollars a year alone. So please don't say that working people only make 4,000 a year. That's obviously not true here in Missouri. Maybe you should interview the citizens of Canada and see what they think of their health care policies.http://vimeo.com/1390455. I can't believe that you are a journalist for the Kansas City Star. I guess they will just give a job to anyone.


The track record of universal health care is horrid plus we already have two, Medicare and Medicaid.
The governement can not do simple things like keep a ledger or spend only what they have. With their poor credit rating and deadbeat history, I'll opt for private insurance which is readily available.


"If we go to a single-payer system, would employers be able to cancel their insurance plans as a cost saving measure, and force their employees onto the government plan?"

Good question, but since the Obama plan and all the serious alternatives being discussed aren't anything like single-payer (despite the best efforts of some on here to say otherwise), it's not something we'll have to face.

Pub 17

Exactly, and remember the nature of the discussion: when I went into Linwood was not long after they had cleaned up after the nationally-reported story of inspections that had revealed at least one case of a patient lying there with maggots in his nose. My remarks were in the context of a discussion about why I was so p.o.'d at the pig Sam Graves, the worst of a bad Missouri Republican Congressional delegation that loves to wave the flag on Veterans' Day and then vote against veterans' benefits. The VA does a damn good job, and it does a better job when it gets adequate funding. MY complaints with VA approach zero: for one thing, they never once f*ed up my records, which my JoCo doctors in the shiny white building do on a regular basis.


I needed VA med services up on Linwood in the era when guys were on their backs with maggots in their noses, and that's not going to happen again.

Posted by: Pub 17 | Oct 7, 2008 9:19:36 AM

Couldn't resist. It took about 2 minutes to find this post. To be fair, maybe it wasn't the visit you described this morning, but it does look like you haven't always had good care at the VA.


If we go to a single-payer system, would employers be able to cancel their insurance plans as a cost saving measure, and force their employees onto the government plan? It seems unlikely that employers would share the savings by increasing their employees’ salaries an amount equivalent to the employer’s portion of the health insurance – something that was previously paid as a benefit. If that’s the case, employees stand to lose twice – first when they lose out on their benefit, and again when, as taxpayers, they pay for the entire country’s health care.

Pub 17

And the fried chicken at the geedunk counter was in violation of the Geneva Conventions.

Pub 17

Not this little black duck.

VA was crowded, not all that clean, and one orderly would wipe his hand on his scrubs if he splashed anything emptying the bedpans. That's the sum and extent of my complaints with VA. If I wasn't such a lazy scut I'd go over and volunteer to push the coffee cart around once a week.



I'm fairly certain that I remember you railing against the VA system, using some sort of examples of how you were laying in one of their beds listening to other scream, to no avail, for help.


I couldn't agree more Mary. They are leaving single payer out of the discussion. It really makes the most sense for all Americans including small business owners.

If you would like to help pressure Congress to pass single payer please join our voting bloc at: http://www.votingbloc.org/Health_Bloc.php

Pub 17

Since GCYL is a poli sci major at Penn Valley, his experience with VA is a little bit limited. VA saved my life twice, for pocket change, thirty-five years after my separation from the military. After I went back on the beach for medical care, I made some deprecatory remarks about VA diagnoses to my new, BMW driving JoCo specialists, and got nothing but serious looks and, "Nothing wrong with VA treatment, dogg." OK, they didn't say, "Dogg." Two of them had rotated through VA in the last five years.

So go to hell, GCYL. As long as we don't have a flag-wavin' Republican in office, cuttin' that budget for our brave heroes who wore the uniform of our country, VA works.






Engineer is right on this one. I'm not sure where Mary's figures are coming from, but my guess is that she was looking at the wrong percentage number or some sort of monthly figures. I'm surprised that the Star's letters editor would miss such obvious error.

According to what I've found, most Missouri programs set the income limit somewhere above the federal poverty level, with programs such as pregnancy assistance being available at the 185% level (almost $41,000/yr).



“If a program similar to traditional Medicare were available, we’d leave the nightmare of private health insurance in droves." – Mary

By all means Mary build a better mousetrap. Most importantly build it with out my family my employer my money and me. Why don’t you and the government create a health insurance program that is fully funded by its members? Have the free market test it. Show us that this government ran health insurance is the envy of world. Let us come to the conclusion that we now have a viable solution to your “nightmare of private health insurance” and watch us FREELY join your new health insurance in droves.

But no it’s mandatory this and mandatory that. My children not covered? They must be enrolled. The government finds my employer’s benefit package is lacking, they must pay for this new health insurance.

Everyone ready to have the VA Hospitals as their list of health care providers?


I don't know where the letter writer got her income figures. However the Federal Poverty Level for 2009 for a family with 4 older children is slightly over $22,000.00. Missouri puts the limit on such families at the FPL. With young children it can go up to 3 times FPL.


Mary, let me ask you...Four months to get an MRI? Pre-natal care only available in Mexico (as it is now between Canada and Oregon).....is this really what you want???

You have a right to be disturbed Mary, fut FGS use your head a little....

About KansasCity.com | About the Real Cities Network | Terms of Use & Privacy Statement | About Knight Ridder | Copyright