What single-payer looks like, up close and personal

My wife and I took my 91-year-old mom to the emergency room yesterday because she had a bad pain in her back and said she now needed 24-hour care.  After ten hours waiting, she was finally admitted.

As I heard her continuous, continuous screaming and crying, when her blood pressure went to 220/130, at which point she asked God to help her and that it was time to go, and as she had two morphine shots, other pain relievers, and finally a muscle relaxer, I learned that none of that would allow her to be admitted under Medicare.

A C.T. scan showed that in a fall, she had caused an acute fracture in a vertebrae.  She had literally broken her back.  The same bureaucracy was at work when I was told that this alone would also not be accepted as a legitimate cause for a stay at the hospital, according to Medicare.  You see, a broken back, according to the bureaucrats at the government, merits only observation, not admittance, because three days in the hospital might cause Medicare to have to pay for 20 days of acute nursing home treatment.

Thank goodness my mom also has a UTI, is dehydrated, isn't eating, and isn't confused, because that might be good enough for Medicare.  The doctors are not even sure that all of this will qualify mom for Medicare coverage, but obviously, she will be headed to an acute care facility this week whether we have to pay for it or they do.  She certainly can't go home.

Anyone who believes that Medicare for all or single-payer insurance is the solution and that there would be no limits for many of the gravely ill has been seriously misled.  There are limits all over the place within Medicare.  I would rather argue with any private insurer than attempt to argue with the government because with the government and its massive, unaccountable bureaucracy, I will lose.

The reason Democrats took off all limits to care for private insurance companies within Obamacare was to get rid of competition and to get to single-payer.  Smaller companies cannot afford no annual and no lifetime risk rules, so competition disappears as a few behemoths remain.  In contrast, it is OK with Democrats if Medicare limits its risks and slaps on massive rules; it just won't tolerate that if it is done in the private sector.

All of you who want the government to control health care should think of the British baby Charlie Gard, whose the parents have no choice under Britain's National Health Service, not even if they want to pay, because this is what single-payer looks like.  Or think of anyone here with a broken back.

We need our freedom back.

My wife and I took my 91-year-old mom to the emergency room yesterday because she had a bad pain in her back and said she now needed 24-hour care.  After ten hours waiting, she was finally admitted.

As I heard her continuous, continuous screaming and crying, when her blood pressure went to 220/130, at which point she asked God to help her and that it was time to go, and as she had two morphine shots, other pain relievers, and finally a muscle relaxer, I learned that none of that would allow her to be admitted under Medicare.

A C.T. scan showed that in a fall, she had caused an acute fracture in a vertebrae.  She had literally broken her back.  The same bureaucracy was at work when I was told that this alone would also not be accepted as a legitimate cause for a stay at the hospital, according to Medicare.  You see, a broken back, according to the bureaucrats at the government, merits only observation, not admittance, because three days in the hospital might cause Medicare to have to pay for 20 days of acute nursing home treatment.

Thank goodness my mom also has a UTI, is dehydrated, isn't eating, and isn't confused, because that might be good enough for Medicare.  The doctors are not even sure that all of this will qualify mom for Medicare coverage, but obviously, she will be headed to an acute care facility this week whether we have to pay for it or they do.  She certainly can't go home.

Anyone who believes that Medicare for all or single-payer insurance is the solution and that there would be no limits for many of the gravely ill has been seriously misled.  There are limits all over the place within Medicare.  I would rather argue with any private insurer than attempt to argue with the government because with the government and its massive, unaccountable bureaucracy, I will lose.

The reason Democrats took off all limits to care for private insurance companies within Obamacare was to get rid of competition and to get to single-payer.  Smaller companies cannot afford no annual and no lifetime risk rules, so competition disappears as a few behemoths remain.  In contrast, it is OK with Democrats if Medicare limits its risks and slaps on massive rules; it just won't tolerate that if it is done in the private sector.

All of you who want the government to control health care should think of the British baby Charlie Gard, whose the parents have no choice under Britain's National Health Service, not even if they want to pay, because this is what single-payer looks like.  Or think of anyone here with a broken back.

We need our freedom back.

RECENT VIDEOS