Industry and association dollars flowed like a swollen Mississippi following a spring thaw to shut it down. It was going to be too expensive, too cumbersome, too complicated, and it would be the very end of medicine and medical care in America, we were assured, ominously.

::::::::

In the year and months leading to the showdown, the battlements of the Right--nearly the entirety of the Republican Party, the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association, the American pharmaceutical industry, the health insurance industry, and the American medical equipment manufacturing industry--were arrayed against the program. Industry and association dollars flowed like a swollen Mississippi following a spring thaw to shut it down. It was going to be too expensive, too cumbersome, too complicated, and it would be the very end of medicine and medical care in America, we were assured, ominously. 

But on July 30, 1965, on the back of an overwhelming Democratic majority in both chambers of Congress, President Lyndon Johnson signed into law "The Social Security Act of 1965"-; more popularly known as Medicare. At the bill-signing ceremony, President Johnson enrolled former president Harry S. Truman as the first Medicare beneficiary, and presented him with the very first Medicare card. 

In 1965 the average life expectancy for Americas was 72.5 years. As of 2004, for all races and genders, the average was 77.8 years. But, once one actually reaches the age of 65, that person's life expectancy grows to 83.7 years. (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr56/nvsr56_09.pdf) 

And when it came his turn to make an opening statement in the June 17 Health Committee mark-up, Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown recalled a letter from one of his constituents, one that was similar in tone and substance to many he'd received on the topic: "Please keep the government out of heathcare; it's socialism, it's too expensive, it's too complicated. I've been on Medicare for 15 years and it works just fine."- 

One of the truest facts of life that adhere to each and every one of us is that the status of our health is a game of chance.

Some folks lead a charmed life. They actually experience what the late comedian George Burns said was the way he wanted to go: "Be shot at the age of 100 by a jealous husband."- In other words, these folks have never known a sick day in their lives, or a day when they weren't in perfect health.

Including me, my own family hasn't been so lucky. We're like most Americans, living one day to the next hoping we won't come down with some debilitating and financially crippling setback; an illness or an injury. Every day for most Americans we play Russian Roulette. The wheel is spun, and we just hope there's nothing seriously perilous in the chamber when we pull the trigger, when we turn off the alarm and wake up. 

But what do we do, if and when, the cancer round hits us in the breast, or the prostate, or the colon, or the brain? Or, perhaps it's a sudden, crushing blow to the heart. Maybe what is etched on the round is a fall or other accident that leaves us with a spine injury, or a shattered pelvis. You never know. And that's one of the rules in the game of life, this version of Russian Roulette that all of us play. 

A few days ago, June 17, the Senate Health Committee began their mark-up of whatever healthcare reform bill it intends will leave the committee. Part 2 of the Day 1 session began with opening remarks (speeches) by the committee members. Immediately follows is the link to that session: (http://www.c-spanarchives.org/library/includes/templates/library/flash_popup.php?pID=287096-2&clipStart=&clipStop= ). In attendance were Acting Chair Chris Dodd (D-CT) and Ranking member Mike Enzi (R-WY). Others attendees included John McCain (R-AZ), Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Johnny Isakson (R-GA), Orin Hatch (R-UT).

At the bottom of the video are controls for start, pause, stop, volume, and a slide-triangle that will progress or regress to the specific point in the session the viewer wants to access.)   

That the "conservatives"- were quite well represented is the reason I cited them up front. As you could guess, however the Republican members all acknowledged the need for reform and saluted the idea that all Americans should have access to healthcare, all their recommendations were to proposed programs that would leave the present scheme largely as it is. Except the health insurance companies would have a lot more customers.

Chairman Dodd was patient and generous. There was no gavel sounding to signal when one member spent excessive time expounding a philosophy. Eventually the alternation of Democratic and Republican found its way to Senator Bernard "Bernie"- Sanders (I-VT). Sanders' opening remarks began at 00·39.43.03·33·36 and ran through 00·54.48.03·33·36, or for a total 15 minutes. Perhaps on the premise that beliefs not constructed on a solid foundation of facts entered as evidence, he divided his remarks into three parts, each of which began with an extraordinarily provocative question.

The first question posed by the senator is the most important question all Americans must answer concerning this debate. "Do you feel Americans should have healthcare as a fundamental right?" Until you are able to answer this in the affirmative, nothing else matters.

I see the question as where the Golden Rule posited by Jesus--"Love thy neighbor as thyself"---really gets answered. It breaks down to not how much you think your neighbors should be expected to spend on your healthcare, but how much you are prepared to spend of your own resources on behalf of a neighbor you likely will never meet. That's a tough one. And there's only one answer for all who genuinely follow Jesus of Nazareth.

Sanders pointed out that over a hundred years ago, the states and the federal government concluded that ". . . every kid in America had a right to public education."- At the time, nothing convincing was included in the debate posturing education should be restricted to the landed gentry. And the decision to move forward without regard for economic status made of this country the most incredibly powerful and wealthiest nation the world had ever known.

Buttressing his suggestion that basic health ought to be a fundamental right of all Americans, Sanders went on to observe that when one calls 9-1-1, the operator never inquires whether the caller is of a particular economic class, or about the sum of the taxes the caller pays. Emergency personnel are sent to the scene, and no qualifying economic considerations ever enter the discussion.

But, he added, many in this country, no matter they might say something else publicly, their actions and votes say, "If you're poor and get sick, tough, you're on your own."- 

His second question, on the assumption that all could agree on the moral propriety affirming some fundamental right to basic healthcare, was, "How to provide comprehensive healthcare to everyone in a cost effective way, a way that doesn't break the country's bank? For effect, he repeated the qualifying phrase, "cost effective way."-

The Independent senator from Vermont then quoted from numerous respectable sources, including health insurance corporation statements. On a per capita basis, we spend twice as much as any other nation, but according to World Health Organization statistics, for overall health, we are 37^th . . . among every other nation on earth. We are worse for birth weight, for life expectancy, for maternal death rates, for obesity, for diabetes, for virtually every measure that should embarrass us.

He suggested we might take a serious look at what other countries are doing, to get better results for the money we're spending. On average, per adult, we're spending $7,900 on healthcare. Yet we have at least 46 million Americans with no access to healthcare, the uninsured. Another 46 million are under-insured. Twenty thousand Americans die every year--nearly seven times as many as were lost on 9-11--because they lack access. Sanders then opined rhetorically, "But at least we're not spending a lot of money!"-

The total sum spent by the US last year on healthcare was $2.7 TRILLION! That was 18% of our GDP; 18% of every penny, nickel, dime, quarter and dollar our labors produced. And the trajectory is pointing to an accelerated rate of climb. Businesses, large and small, are making staffing and benefit decisions that bode ill for this country. 

And with all that, Senator Sanders put another demographic on the table: In 2007, 1,000,000 Americans filed for bankruptcy, and of that one million, more than 62% was prompted by a medical calamity.

He noted that the per capita expenditure in Canada was $3,700; in France it was $3,400; in Italy, the per capita expenditure for healthcare was $2,600. All of them had not merely better results overall, but significantly superior results!

I'm going to insert reference again to Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown's opening remarks for a reason. (The entirety of his remarks can be found at 01·00·25.03·33·36) Senator Brown cited one salient piece of information from the US Abstract (See citation link in the third paragraph, above.) Despite every other gloomy statistic, once an American reaches 65, he or she then has the best chance of every 65-year-old on earth to attain longevity!

I will not provide the answer here, the one noted by Brown. But you need to ask, what happens for all Americans, once they reach age 65? The answer is illuminating to the point of near epiphany, and should serve as a dagger to the heart of all arguments that are in opposition to the solution proffered by Sanders, cited below, or introduction of a "government option,"- favored by all except the Republican Party and the American Medical Association. 

Now, back to Senator Sanders. He asked the committee, rhetorically, "What makes the US different from every other country? We spend more, but get less than any other nation on earth. What's different in our system?"-

We are the only nation that uses private insurance. He then observed what every senator, regardless which side of the isle he or she sits on, already knew: "The job of private insurance is not healthcare. The job of private insurance is to make as much money as it can. And one of the ways they make as much money as possible is to DENY [emphasis mine] healthcare to as many Americans as they can."- Every insurance company has an army of investigators whose sole function is to look for a way to deny coverage to as many people who are really sick as possible, and to rescind their policies whenever that is possible. A dollar in healthcare that is denied increases the company's profit by the exact same amount!

From public federal and corporate records, he introduced some highly provocative facts. Over the past 30 years, the number of the insurance industry's administrative staff that are dedicated to denial of coverage and rescission of same was 25 times greater than the number of physicians in the US! The growth of the private health insurance company profits, from 2003 to 2007 was 170%! The average annual income for the Top-Seven health insurance CEOs was $14.2 MILLION! And, last but not least, the total compensation package for United Health's William McGuire was$1.6 BILLION!!!!!

With these facts on the table, Sanders asked his rhetorical Question 3: "What kind of a system is most likely to provide comprehensive, universal healthcare for all Americans at the lowest possible cost?"-

Sanders answered the question he'd posted with, "a single-payer, universal healthcare system."- However every committee member suspected it was coming, the shock was palpable on the Republican side, just as much as if a rowdy renegade had stood in the middle of solemn funeral service and let loose with a torrent of the most gross obscenities.

No one on either side of the issue suffers under the delusion that a "single-payer"- system affording universal comprehensive healthcare to all Americans stands any chance of passage. The armies of money and might are just too formidable. But what we can achieve, what we must include in any reform, at the very least, is the "government option"- all Republicans stridently oppose. We must for all the truths laid on the table by Senator Sanders.

US Representative John Dingell, Democrat of Michigan's 15^th District, is the only surviving, attending witness to the ceremony. Around 3:30 in the afternoon of August 14, 1935 President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed into law the "Social Security Act of 1935."- There had not been a single Republican vote in favor. The president initially wanted the program to include universal healthcare for all Americans, but that would have been one bridge too far. 

In the current committee mark-up, Alaska's Republican US senator, Lisa Murkowski, suggested that an overhaul of the current system was too complicated and too expensive, and that what should proceed to the floor from the committee was a simpler bill, one that would entitle Americans to access health insurance coverage through the present for-profit private insurers. And if changes were needed, "We can come back later . . .."-

For nearly a full three-quarters of a century we have been coming "back later."- Even all Republicans acknowledge later is no longer an option. The very conservative Republican US Senator from Georgia, Johnny Isakson, concluded his opening remarks with "This country cannot afford to get this wrong, because, if we do, we won't have a country."-      

While it may be a problem common to other countries, I don't care. I don't live in any other country, nor do my sons. But the biggest and most serious problem facing us now is apathy; the absence of concern by Americans to inform themselves on an issue that, along the sentiment expressed by Senator Isakson, truly could prove to be the end of the line for the United States of America, as we know it today and as we might ever want it to be in the future.

Not caring sufficiently to take the simple steps necessary to become informed is, to me, the single most egregious attitude and behavior any American could take. On that, a willful ignorance, again, to my way of thinking, is tantamount to treason. Furthermore, all who have taken the little trouble it takes to become informed have an additional responsibility. We must collar our friends, our associates and our relatives, and demand of them that they also become informed. For if we do not, it seems to me we make of ourselves willing coconspirators in the treason. Given all the incredible economic burdens that are hard bearing down, while I agree with the Georgia senator on very little, I agree with him wholeheartedly on the last phrase in his concluding sentence: " . . . we won't have a country."-

Authors Bio:
An "Old Army Vet" and liberal, qua liberal, with a passion for open inquiry in a neverending quest for truth unpoisoned by religious superstitions. Per Voltaire: "He who can lead you to believe an absurdity can lead you to commit an atrocity."