Perhaps this was the case that put a crack in his armor. Yet his real transformation occurred a year later not far from his rural Virginia home at a local "health fair." Potter was shocked to see a scene akin to a third world nation. Thousands of people were lined up in the pouring rain while hundreds more received medical treatments under a make-shift hospital tent. Until he saw for himself the direct results of profits-before-people health care, Potter was a non-believer. The experience galvanized him to testify before a Senate committee that his and other health insurance companies, "dumped the sick to satisfy investors."
Haves and Have Nots
We have created a system of haves and have-nots. Those who have healthcare do not want to share the pie and continue to call for "freedom" for the "corporatocracy" that disenfranchises whole segments of the population.
Certain loudmouthed government-subsidized lawmakers, intellectually challenged talk-show hosts, and (ironically) recipients of Social Security and Medicare oppose helping fellow citizens have the same opportunities they enjoy at our expense.
What happened in America to the Golden Rule? Have we completely lost our moral compass?
If it were not for contributions from American taxpayers aged 25 to 65, there would be no Medicare or Social Security. We are the ones supporting Grandma and Grandpa. Most of us are proud to do it even if there may not be anything left for us. What would the country be like if the younger generations took the Tea Party stance and said "No way Jose. We are not going to support "socialized medicine' or "government pensions' for seniors!"
Let's face it - no insurance company would insure the elderly if they were not forced to do so by the U.S. government.
Fifty years ago, the battle for "medical care for the aged" echoed the current fight for health care reform.
One lawmaker wrote on the eve of the Medicare vote:
"Stories of personal hardships to older persons who have been unable to meet medical expenses, who have gone without care they needed, who have lost all the savings of a lifetime with one catastrophic illness. I don't know how anyone could ignore these facts or fail to recognize that there is a great human need that is not being met by the wealthiest nation in the world."
Despite this sentiment, there was tremendous opposition to "socialized medicine" for senior citizens. The same sort of protests erupted against Medicare that we now experience with the new health care bill. The American Medical Association along with many of the nation's hospitals simply refused to take part in the program, even after it was made the law of the land. It took LBJ to work out a diplomatic solution and pressure the medical community to participate.
Circa 1964:
One doctor stated his objection to Medicare: "I have never had it brought to my attention that anyone suffered from lack of medical care because they were unable to pay for it."
An Arizona resident said: "Not only is it unconstitutional to provide compulsory medical aid, but it is also very unwise. It is just another socialist scheme to destroy our sovereignty."
Another person commented: "The aged people do not need this system of help, and it is just another way to take the individual's dignity away from him and make weaker people become captives to a dole system."
In 2010, some Medicare recipients are publicly echoing the same views about universal healthcare. Equal access to health care is "socialized medicine" and will undermine our democratic capitalist structure, they claim. We have heard it all before--fifty years ago for those alive then and seventy years ago for those who remember the Social Security debate.
Haves and Have Nots
We have created a system of haves and have-nots. Those who have healthcare do not want to share the pie and continue to call for "freedom" for the "corporatocracy" that disenfranchises whole segments of the population.
Certain loudmouthed government-subsidized lawmakers, intellectually challenged talk-show hosts, and (ironically) recipients of Social Security and Medicare oppose helping fellow citizens have the same opportunities they enjoy at our expense.
What happened in America to the Golden Rule? Have we completely lost our moral compass?
If it were not for contributions from American taxpayers aged 25 to 65, there would be no Medicare or Social Security. We are the ones supporting Grandma and Grandpa. Most of us are proud to do it even if there may not be anything left for us. What would the country be like if the younger generations took the Tea Party stance and said "No way Jose. We are not going to support "socialized medicine' or "government pensions' for seniors!"
Let's face it - no insurance company would insure the elderly if they were not forced to do so by the U.S. government.
Fifty years ago, the battle for "medical care for the aged" echoed the current fight for health care reform.
One lawmaker wrote on the eve of the Medicare vote:
"Stories of personal hardships to older persons who have been unable to meet medical expenses, who have gone without care they needed, who have lost all the savings of a lifetime with one catastrophic illness. I don't know how anyone could ignore these facts or fail to recognize that there is a great human need that is not being met by the wealthiest nation in the world."
Despite this sentiment, there was tremendous opposition to "socialized medicine" for senior citizens. The same sort of protests erupted against Medicare that we now experience with the new health care bill. The American Medical Association along with many of the nation's hospitals simply refused to take part in the program, even after it was made the law of the land. It took LBJ to work out a diplomatic solution and pressure the medical community to participate.
Circa 1964:
One doctor stated his objection to Medicare: "I have never had it brought to my attention that anyone suffered from lack of medical care because they were unable to pay for it."
An Arizona resident said: "Not only is it unconstitutional to provide compulsory medical aid, but it is also very unwise. It is just another socialist scheme to destroy our sovereignty."
Another person commented: "The aged people do not need this system of help, and it is just another way to take the individual's dignity away from him and make weaker people become captives to a dole system."
In 2010, some Medicare recipients are publicly echoing the same views about universal healthcare. Equal access to health care is "socialized medicine" and will undermine our democratic capitalist structure, they claim. We have heard it all before--fifty years ago for those alive then and seventy years ago for those who remember the Social Security debate.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
