WE’RE MAD AS HELL!

A funny thing happened on my way to reading more of HR 3200. I found a link in my email to the Mad As Hell Doctors of Oregon. They have put up some of their own money to fund a cross country trip in a message wrapped motor home promoting universal health care in the form of HR 676, calling for single payer health insurance.

Here is what they have to say:

"We're mad as hell because our health care system is run by people who profit from illness" says Dr. Paul Hochfeld, lead Mad As Hell Doctor and producer of the documentary '

Health, Money and Fear.' "The rest of the civilized world has test driven single payer and it works. But elected officials in America won't even allow a discussion."
"The public option is a trap." Hochfeld continues. "It sounds very reasonable, but the problem with it, no matter what the final bill looks like, is that it will continue to allow private medical insurance companies to dictate America's public health policies. And that's just plain wrong."

The rest of the story is HERE.

So,I decided to check out HR 676. First, it has only 30 pages, a definite improvement over the 1017 pages of HR 3200. Next, the contents are laid out in an orderly and logical fashion and include how it will be funded.

Everyone is covered, period. You will fill out a form and then get a card. You will be able to go to any doctor anywhere in the country. Doctors and medical facilities will remain privately owned but must be nonprofit and cannot be investor owned. All necessary medical procedures are covered, including eye care and dental care. There are no deductibles and no co-pays. Anything not covered by the universal plan can be offered in coverage by a private insurance company which would be things like plastic surgery.

There would be an operating budget that would be divided to cover actual medical costs and then capital improvement costs to ensure a high level of health care delivery. Physicians will be offered payment options to best suit their needs.

Long term care needs will be provided for and it is calling for what should have been part of Medicare long ago; to focus on providing coverage for in-home care or community based care as opposed to institutional care.

The only thing I would criticize in this bill is in the prescription drug provisions. I have personally had a problem with the issue I’m about to discuss in regard to my private insurance (when I had it) as I’m sure others have had. There have also been comments about the same problem with public health entities like Medicare.

The problem is the formularies used that lean heavily toward generics. While this works fine in most cases, there are certain people, certain drugs and certain conditions that require this plan to be flexible enough to make medically necessary exceptions for patient safety and well-being. These include thyroid conditions, seizure disorders and heart conditions. I think I’ll send an email to one of the bill’s co sponors about this issue.

A downloadable version of this bill can be found HERE and I promise you, you don’t need a law degree or a medical degree to read it.
And when you have doctors backing it, well, I’ll give the last word to another of the Mad As Hell Docs:

"People need to understand what single-payer is--and isn't," says Dr. Mike Huntington, a radiologist from Corvallis, Oregon and fellow Mad As Hell Doctor. "It isn't Socialism, any more than police and fire are Socialism. And it doesn't require any more money. Simply put, single-payer is a way to take current premium payments that go to a thousand different private insurance companies, and redirect them into a single, public fund that insures everyone. That's all it is. But when we do this, lots of wonderful things happen, not the least of which is to save Americans 500 billion dollars a year starting day one. That's billion - with a 'b.' America needs this information. That's why we're taking the tour."

To find out when they’ll be in a city near you, go HERE.

Of Civility and Satirists: Style and Substance

Just a quick thought or two about Jon Stewart and The Daily Show. Have been watching his show lately with a view to analyzing what he does best. I think his strong point is something that runs deeper than the obvious wit and the various parodic characters who add silly-serious variety: it's the host's civility. More particularly, it's the fact that with regard to civility, Stewart acts upon the insight that this quality need not, and should not, entail compromise on one's principles. Civility doesn't consist in abandoning your core beliefs – or indeed any beliefs – merely to ingratiate yourself with someone who thinks differently. Doing that is weakness, not civility, and it is consistently and justly rewarded with contempt.

What civility entails is a willingness to listen – at least to the extent tolerable to a rational person – and to treat one's opponents like human beings rather than propagating lies about them or demonizing them and the entire view they stand for. I think the August 20, 2009 interview Stewart conducted with Betsy McCaughey is a fine example of the method that flows from this understanding. A lot of commentators simply describe this woman as "the originator of the death-panel canard," and she may or may not in fact deserve the appellation, but Stewart was able to hold a substantive and polite conversation with her without ceding anything of substance on the argument in favor of health care reform. Now that is truly impressive.

What I solicit by this brief run-down of one major program generally associated with a liberal or progressive viewpoint (Stewart himself might not agree with the link between his name and such terms, and I see no reason why he should) is some thoughtful commentary about the style and substance of other such programs and hosts – Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, Bill Maher, and others may come to mind. Any Keithers, Rachelites, or Maherians out there have something better than silence to opine? Say it here on Swash Zone, or be square.

One toke over the line

Porque no tiene,
Porque le falta,
Marijuana que fumar.

I wonder how long we'll be able to keep the US/Mexico border under control with the number of crossings sure to increase by a factor of a hundred at any moment now. I have a feeling millions of Americans will be on their way south now that Mexico has decriminalized Heroin, Cocaine, LSD, methamphetimines and Marijuana.

Andale! Arriba!

Raw Story reported this morning that small amounts of these drugs would now be tolerated.

"Prosecutors said the new law sets clear limits that keep Mexico's corruption-prone police from shaking down casual users and offers addicts free treatment to keep growing domestic drug use in check."

It won't do much to hurt tourism either. It remains to be seen whether they will see the same influx of foreign stoners that the Netherlands has had to deal with and the same problems with petty crime, but it is an indication that Mexico at least, is tired of doing the same thing that's been making the situation worse and worse for nearly a century and trying to do something that won't feed the plague of violence and corruption.

"The new law sets out maximum "personal use" amounts for drugs, also including LSD and methamphetamine. People detained with those quantities no longer face criminal prosecution"

said Mexican attorney general Bernardo Espino del Castillo. Thanks Bernie and seeya all south of the border.
Down Mexico way.


*Disclaimer -- the above post does not necessarily reflect the views of Capt. Fogg or anyone in particular and is intended to be a farcical and sophomoric attempt to get some laughs -- and you can put that in your pipe and smoke it.

LIGHTER FARE

An assortment of political cartoons from a contentious week:

H/T: Joan from South Florida

H/T to "democommie" at Southern Beale’s blog for this:

Satan has a meeting with the entire GOP leadership. He shows them a Powerpoint presentation of a world gone amok: War, pestilence, famine, endlessly proliferating TV reality shows, and says:

"All this can be yours -- and it can be very, very profitable. The only thing I require is the blood sacrifice of your entire base of useful idiots -- AND your souls."

Suddenly Newt Gingrich pipes in: "What's the catch?"

Threat level orange

Well it certainly won't be a surprise to anyone who thought the Bush administration was using Tom Ridge's color coded threat levels to keep his poll ratings up every time they needed a boost - like right before an election. even though he was quoted in 2004 as saying

"We don’t do politics in the Department of Homeland Security."

Ridge's new book contains at least one bombshell of a revelation according to MSNBC's Chris Matthews - yes indeed Ridge was pressured to raise the level days before the 2004 election even though there was no threat. He refused.

In rather dry and understated language he explains that he now had proof that the main concern of the administration was politics and not national security and this was the moment he decided he had to get out.

The Test of Our Times: America Under Siege...and How We Can Be Safe Again is due to be released September first. That should give the Republicans enough time to launch a smear campaign.

Queen Michelle

Almost within hours after Sarah Palin became the Republican VP candidate, Fox news began a preemptive assault on critics, falsely alleging ( it had appeared in the Washington Post as a joke) that planeloads of lawyers had already arrived in Wasilla to "dig up dirt" about her family and that the widespread and stunned reaction to selecting a person of such mediocre and unhinged mind was some kind of smokescreen covering up the true objective of defaming her daughter.

So why am I bringing up such old news? It's possible that I may attract more viral e-mails than anyone else, but I doubt it and in fact you may also have seen the one titled Queen Michelle in your own mailbox recently.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but the theatrical display of shock and offense certainly is a one way thing, because I'm hearing none of it on the subject of Republicans openly calling for the murder of Mrs. Obama and her "Stupid children." I am hearing crap about how Democrats are playing some kind of "race card" to defend against valid criticism, but incitement to riot, incitement to murder and deadly threats against a President are a felony, not a playing card. Where's the protest from Republicans?

Our former First Lady was treated with a great deal of respect and bipartisan praise. Very little was made of her history or background or of having been the first and only First Lady to have killed someone. Nothing whatever was made of her large staff and payroll.

It's true that Michelle's is not an elected office but there are traditional duties that have long required the services of people from hairdressers to personal secretaries and assistants. Nobody worries much about it since in a great many instances she has to represent the United States here and abroad.

So deep is the desperation of the lunatic fringe that now makes up most of the Republican party that all prior restraints have evaporated in the lust to defame, smear, degrade, insult, intimidate, threaten and humiliate president Obama's family, and the giggling cowards can't turn out the propaganda fast enough.

Queen Michelle is the title, and it begins:

"First Lady Requires More Than Twenty Attendants

July 7, 2009 - Dr. Paul L. Williams"

There is of course, a real Dr. Williams, who writes books about how Islam is plotting to kill us all and about the need for another Crusade and who, like Joe McCarthy uses accusations of harboring Islamic terrorists and nuclear attack plots to throw his weight and his books around.

I don't know that Dr. Paul L. Williams wrote this, but I doubt that the perpetrator of this would ever identify himself or the PAC that employs him. The e-mail goes on to list 22 ( 20 or 26 in some versions) White House staff that Mrs. Obama "employs" at our expense while others of us poor Liberal dominated serfs have to stock shelves at Wal-Mart. Nothing is said about the people who own Wal-Mart or their lifestlye or whether we elected them. Indeed nothing is said of the dodgy Doctor either.

It portrays her as someone much like Marie Antoinette, haughty and disdainful of lesser people, which of course is a confection more airy than the cake Marie legendarily Suggested the French poor should eat.

She has no official duties, it's misleadingly stressed, although it seems that every First Lady since and including Martha Washington has indeed served in many capacities as a diplomat at large, good will ambassador and hostess. Laura Bush was widely praised in that role.

What's not pointed out is that her budget and number of "attendants" is just about the same as Laura Bush had. Nobody called her Queen Laura or threatened to kill her and her children. Only the mind of a Republican could dream up such such ugliness and dare to disseminate it -- and don't expect them to take responsibility or apologize. The best we can hope for is some rhetoric about "Liberals" "whining" about Bush and some foul, rancid, reeking attempt to equate and justify their disgusting behavior because after all "Liberals criticized Bush."

Don't believe it? I politely refuted the claims and replied. My answer from the person who sent my my copy was exactly that - seething fury about how I will

"just have to get used to it and suck it up because you damn communist bastards have been preaching hate for years."

These are your "conservative" values, your family values. This is your party of morality and personal responsibility. Good, Christian folk from small towns in the heartland where all the good Christian values come from. What costume will they put on after someone finally acts out their Satanic passion play? I don't want to think about it. God damn them one and all.

Bully for Teddy

It's a funny thing, the conservative American mind. Talk about quotidian things, work, the weather, and they can be charming, witty, companionable and seem intelligent, but stay away from politics if you don't want to have to discard many friendships. Beneath the mask can lie a morass of anger and ignorance as deep and foetid as hell itself.

I've very often had people express nostalgic longing for a president like Teddy Roosevelt - a hunter, fisherman, outdoorsman, soldier, adventurer and writer of books; a man not afraid to conquer and not likely to apologize for it. A conservative's conservative. Someone who stood, square jawed and well armed astride the American horizon in a time of unlimited freedom, opportunity and prosperity when the lower orders knew their place. Thus are the dreams.

Of course Teddy was often denounced as a Communist Agitator. Today his opinions would have the Sarah Palins and Joe who isn't a plumber flapping in a frenzy like decapitated chickens. He espoused a graduated income tax and more government regulation of financial markets. He advocated more government social programs such as housing for immigrants. Of course there were no Nazis then to be falsely associated with American progressivism and no way to compare him to Hitler as today he inevitably would be.

Roosevelt's time had seen the effects of economic booms, panics and busts in rapid and relentless quick step. Economic inequality was growing, monopolies were tightening their grip on free markets and massive accumulations of private wealth were threatening democracy. His vision didn't include doing nothing or faith in the power of doing nothing or blind trust of the altruism of the very, very wealthy.

"Those who oppose reform will do well to remember that ruin in its worst form is inevitable if our national life brings us nothing better than swollen fortunes for the few and the triumph in both politics and business of a sordid and selfish materialism "

said Roosevelt in a famous 1910 speech calling for a "New Nationalism" One wonders what bizarre grotesqueries of accusation would emerge had it been given today. Would people be carrying weapons to his speeches, would he be called a tyrant, would there be hysteria over the way he was "dismantling freedom?" Would they question his citizenship, his patriotism; accuse him of murder? It's hard to tell but surely Barack Obama has suffered worse for less radical statements.

Of course Teddy had to remind his audience after he said

"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration"

that he was quoting Abraham Lincoln because he was regularly being called a totalitarian himself - as well as a Communist. Perhaps such things never change, but the perception of an America that's sliding irretrievably down a slope toward the antithetical perdition of communism and fascism because sentiments such as those of Lincoln and Roosevelt are essentially "far-left" and "liberal" and we're being assured of it daily by mindless maggots with megaphones.

It seems that the Niebelungs of negativity have been crying wolf for a very long time, but look at how well the average man lives today compared to how he lived a hundred years ago when poverty consumed most of us and faith based laws restricted huge numbers to certain neighborhoods, certain jobs, certain levels of education, certain expectations of justice in an essentially Hobbsian society.

Somehow I cannot believe that a hundred years of progress toward more liberal goals have made us justifiably disgruntled. We live longer, live better, cleaner, healthier and have far more freedom to alter our circumstances for the better. The slope has not been slippery, the slope never existed. Progressive income tax has not stifled entrepreneurship which has thrived even in times of over 80% top brackets and in fact it seems to dampen economic cycles. It seems the only wolves that have shown up were wearing conservative clothing and warning us of wolves.

Isn't a new nationalism what we need today? The old kind and the old attitude and the old maxims and the old and vicious, dishonest and hate-filled rhetoric has never done us any good and have now brought us to the brink.

WE RETURN TO OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED FREE-FOR-ALL

On Sunday evening, when I first posted this article , I asked for a moratorium on new posts to keep the healthcare debate in the forefront. The response has been informative, surprising in some instances, and engaging overall. I am breaking my own moratorium because the subject has run its course, other voices need to be heard, and another subject has reared an ugly head. Our esteemed colleague, Bloggingdino, brought this to our attention:



We can laugh at the refreshing candor of Barney Frank, but this is no longer funny:



We read about Ernest Hancock, an online radio host who interviewed an assault rifle-wielding associate at a recent Obama rally. Hancock, armed with a 9 millimeter pistol that he himself brought to the rally, is a vocal supporter of a right-wing anti-government militia group convicted of conspiracy and weapons charges in the 90s … plotting to blow up federal buildings.

Chants of “Heil Hitler" and the appearance of guns at meetings and rallies are meant to intimidate and silence people. It also exposes a disturbing fact: Freedom to dissemble appeals to the lowest scum ... anti-Semites, bigots, racists, white supremacists, and violence-prone militias. The GOP exploits the emotional fervor of malcontents and misfits for political leverage. In doing so, they have alienated Blacks, Hispanics, the LGBT community, academicians, artists, intellectuals, scientists, Muslims ... and now ... Jews.

As the saying goes, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." Our so-called conservative friends might agree. They seem to prefer the company of bigots for allies. In bashing "Libtards," they act more like a lynch mob massing at the jailhouse door intent on stringing up scapegoats. In failing to condemn this rabble, they approve of them with their silence; and such so-called 'friends' are no longer deserving of our trust.

Democracy is not well served when hooligans take over. There are times when a Godwin Fallacy is no longer a fallacy ... and these are such times.

HEALTHCARE REFORM: MATTERS OF LIFE AND DEATH FROM AN ALTERNATE UNIVERSE

Last weekend, the healthcare controversy came to my door when friends from South Florida arrived for a visit. Years ago, they were former neighbors. We shared a backyard retention pond that had grown into a wildlife preserve. Each morning, I recall, my neighbor threw birdseed to the resident ducks and moorhens. She had a name for every critter. “My buddies,” she called them.

My former neighbors and now dear friends had an appointment at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville. Her cancer is treatable and manageable, but she suffers from fatigue and takes mega doses of Percocet and morphine to relieve pain. Last week, she and her husband checked into a Marriot Inn near the clinic for days of blood tests, X-Rays, MRIs, and consultations.

Since I live within two hours of Jacksonville, I invited them to stay for a weekend. On Saturday, we treated ourselves to a boat ride, dined on fennel and endive salad, baked grouper, and homemade hazelnut cake. On Sunday, we talked, watched sailboats lumber past my balcony, watched billowy cotton ball clouds turn red against a setting sun.

On Monday morning, just before their return trip to Jacksonville for more diagnostics, the hospital called their cell phone: Their insurance carrier had not “pre-authorized” the tests.

For my friends and millions of families like them, this is our current healthcare system: Arbitrary decisions made, not by medical doctors, but by insurance carriers that force them to chose between timely treatment or bankruptcy, living or dying.

To read conservative commentary is to enter a Universe of reverse polarity where private health insurers are the angels, and the devil by default is government. You read dire predictions about “Death Panels” run by bureaucrats who will eat your baby or kill your grandmother; but you will hear nothing about the Death Panels of private insurers who would kill my friend or bankrupt her family … and pocket their insurance premiums with a crocodile smile.

One can understand misplaced outrage with some justification. All of us, liberal and conservative alike, were rightfully angry about the $700 billion bailout of Wall Street and the outrageous bonuses paid to crooks and scoundrels at taxpayer expense. Yet, our rightwing friends ignore an inconvenient truth: The same greed and corruption that almost ruined Wall Street are ruining our healthcare system. Here is a snapshot of our current situation:

In 2008, total US healthcare spending reached $2.4 trillion, representing 17% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). By 2017, healthcare spending will climb to 20% GDP.

How does our current healthcare system compare with other countries? At 17% GDP, we spend far more than Switzerland 10.9%, Germany 10.7%, Canada 9.7%, and France 9.5%.

Since 1999, health insurance premium costs have risen 120%. In contrast, cumulative inflation rose 44%, and cumulative wage growth rose 29%. When adjusted for inflation and runaway healthcare costs, real wages have fallen.

Has the most expensive healthcare system in the world reduced infant mortality? Not according to the 2009 World Factbook, published by our own CIA. The USA ranks below 45 nations: USA 6.26, Cuba 5.82, European Union 5.72, Canada 5.04, Switzerland 4.18, Germany 3.99, and France 3.33, as examples.

Bankruptcies: In 2007, medical bills accounted for 62.1% of personal insolvencies, an increase of 50% in six years.

In short, the most expensive healthcare system in the world is not making us healthy, wealthy, or wise. To maximize earnings, private insurers ‘cherry pick’ the most profitable subscribers, reject high-risk applicants, eliminate those with “pre-existing” conditions, limit benefits, drop customers, and charge higher premiums. One inevitable consequence of a profit-driven system is a large pool of “medically uninsurable” applicants who are denied access to affordable, quality healthcare.

Another consequence are high premium costs that partition our people into ‘haves’ and ‘have nots.’ An estimated 47 million people lack healthcare coverage, and medical debts will drive a million people each year into bankruptcy. In an anti-Universe, there are those who proclaim: “The U.S. has the best damn healthcare system in the world.” The real Universe knows otherwise (source):

When the Bush/Cheney administration proposed a prescription drug plan for seniors, Big Pharma won concessions that barred Medicare from negotiating lower prices or importing drugs from cheaper markets. Today, seniors pay 60% more for drugs than veterans because the Veterans Administration has the right to negotiate discounts whereas Medicare does not.

Private insurers, demanding an opportunity to compete with Medicare on “a level playing field,” won $177 billion in subsidies payable over 10 years. When one pays money but gets nothing in return, the more apt term is ‘extortion.’

Shortly after the prescription drug plan became law, 15 congressional and administration officials resigned to take multi-million dollar a year jobs with the drug lobby. Thus, crony capitalism perpetuates a feeding frenzy whose purpose is to privatize profits and socialize risks … turning subscribers and taxpayers into chum.

South of the border, Mexican drug cartels wage bloody turf wars for control over territory and profits. In an anti-Universe north of the border, healthcare cartels wage turf wars in Washington for control over profits and monopolies. In the real world, one plus one equals two. In the anti-Universe of K Street, healthcare cartels script this message: One plus one equals socialism, government-run Death Panels, euthanasia, dead babies and dead grandmothers, service rationing, even shortages of toilet paper.

How do you move the debate from the real world into the shadowy anti-Universe of astroturfing and public hysteria?

Easy! Hire a K Street public relations firm such as Shirley & Banister Public Affairs, whose client list includes: AETNA, CIGNA, Ann Coulter, the Heritage Foundation, and the Republican National Committee. Hire Jack Bonner and Associates to spread false rumors with forged letters. Hire Dick Armey, former Republican House Majority Leader, to organize protests and create the illusion of spontaneous public uprisings.

In a year of deep recession, job losses, home foreclosures, and massive bailouts at taxpayer expense, one can always capitalize on the passions of an angry citizenry fed up with chicanery and corruption … and the all-too-human tendency to seek scapegoats for ritual sacrifice. Those who disrupt town hall meetings are angry, but their anger is misplaced because little do they know that those who incite them do not have their best interests in mind.

Manipulating public opinion is easy when you are the CEO of a corporation with lots of money and lobbyists and politicians in your pocket ... and you can always find a willing mob of malcontents and misfits ready to do your bidding.

In three weeks, my friends from South Florida will return for another visit. Again, we will reminisce about the adorable critters of our fabled pond. Again, we will share a splendid meal, watch a DVD or two, or take a stroll on the beach and splash in the surf. How much time do we have left to enjoy a few precious moments?

Meanwhile the stories of my friends from South Florida and the plight of millions of people in their situation remain untold; their voices drowned beneath the chirps and scrapings of late summer cicadas. Real people in the real world have no lobbyist, no advocate to argue their case, influence the debate, or quell the angry mobs … and that is how America’s healthcare cartels win every time.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AFTERTHOUGHTS

Not since the 1960s have I witnessed a more rancorous and divisive debate. I end this post by calling attention to other noteworthy articles contributed by fellow writers in the Swash Zone:

Captain Fogg defends The Public Option and debunks the deceits, falsehoods, and fabrications that have marred this debate.

Maleeper reminds us how our parents’ generation denounced the evils of socialized medicine in Enough is Enough. How does this generation feel today? She explains: “Years ago my mother was convinced that Medicare would turn the USA into a communist country. Now, at 91, she uses it gratefully.”

Rockync undertakes the redoubtable task of reading the tome known as HR 3200. You can read her section-by-section synopsis here and here. Rocky’s verdict? Nothing to fear thus far.

Bloggingdino offers encouraging words but reminds us about the dangers of self-delusion: “We forget that civilization itself – quite aside from democracy or republican self-governance – is a fragile thing, that its strength and perpetuity must not be taken for granted, and that it demands patient cultivation and education if it is to remain viable from one generation to the next..”

On behalf of the above, I invite all readers and visitors to follow our contributors and join this discussion.

The Public Option.

In Grand Junction Colorado yesterday, a student asked Barack Obama if the "public option" wouldn't be unfair competition to insurance companies that need to make a profit. The presumption behind the question is that making a profit from any enterprise is a fundamental right and that the government needs somehow to insure that profit -- and insure that nothing interferes with maximizing that profit.

This is not the first time such questions have come up in our history. There was a time when fire departments were independent and could choose whether or not to put out the fire in your house depending on whether or not they had an agreement with your insurer, if you had one at all.

Sometimes competing departments would engage in disputes over who had the right to fight the fire while buildings burnt to the ground. Sometimes there were arguments between homeowners and competing fire departments as to what the bill would be before one bucket of water was thrown. Sometimes less honest firefighting companies would loot and pillage while they worked. Some were accused of arson.

Then came the public option, and for the most part it works better than anything else. Everyone is covered, the insurance companies are doing fine and whole towns rarely burn to the ground any more. Moreover the argument that forming a municipal fire department to be funded by the public is unfair to the private sector's right to profit or is "socialism" has faded away in the light of experience. It's simply been far more economical and efficient than allowing multiple private companies to compete with each other and able to decide which fires they will fight and which they will not.

Is this an apt analogy? That's the question we need to ask of people like Zach Lahn, the student who questioned the President. Instead of looking for guidance only to our own unexamined credos, or to the plastic wrapped opinions handed out by insurance companies and the politicians they own, we need to look at history for examples. I think there is insight to be derived here. Perhaps he would agree.

Sometimes the public good and the public safety is best served by a public agency rather than multiple agencies who by definition and nature are motivated to ration services and keep prices as high as possible.