Jack Layton to spread virtues of Canadian universal health care to White House

Source: Macleans

TORONTO - Armed with the virtues of Canadian health care, Jack Layton is heading to Washington this week, hoping to bolster President Barack Obama's intentions to reform the American health system.

The federal New Democrat leader is to spend two and a half days meeting with White House officials and members of Congress.

snip

"But the principles of universality, of access and of insuring that health care's available to everybody, those kinds of principles are very much motivating the Obama administration."

Layton said he and his contingent will aim to destroy what he calls myths being perpetuated by right-wing health care privatizers who don't want Obama's plans realized.



Read more: http://www.macleans.ca/canada/wire/article.jsp?content=n293522824

---

***Mods, this is just over the 12 hr limit but I am hoping you will allow it to stay as it is an important issue. I will understand if that can't happen.

Layton is leader of Canada's NDP party and a damn good one.

:thumbsup:

If you can bring single payer to the US, it will more than make up for forcing the vote of no confidence that thrust Stephen Harper on the world.

we need something better than both of those.

That is America's advantage, the silver lining. Because they have been so slow off the mark to get a universal health care plan going compared to the rest of the world, they can learn the best and worst parts of others. But one thing that those two have is singly payer government paid funding. With a mix of private clinics (still regulated and gov paid) allowed to exist to cover areas that would slow down waiting times (x-rays etc).

BTW Jack Layton represents the New Democrat Party. They first existed as the CCF, the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation, this is the party under Tommy Douglas that brought in medicare for Canadians. He is regarded as the father of Medicare and voted the greatest Canadian ever. The NDP is a third party, besides the Liberals and Conservatives, that is kind of like what the Democrats used to be. The Conservatives are like the Republicans, and the Liberals are like modern day big business Democrats.

that finally brought Medicare to all Canadians. Douglas brought it to Saskatchewan, then his NDP party demanded it during their coalition government with Lester B. Pearson's Liberal Party in the mid to late 1960's. The Canadian health system is a product of both the NDP and Liberal parties of Canada. Coalition governments often produce very meaningful legislation.

Like I said, not to be rude, but Pearson does deserve a great amount of the credit, since the Liberal Party was the majority member of the coalition and could have told Douglas "no" if they desired.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lester_B._Pearson

Mr. Pearson also was the winner of the 1957 Nobel Peace Prize.

'Pearson's Pennant'. It never ceases to amaze me.

Lived through the flag and anthem debate I can understand that there were a lot of Loyal people opposed. Now we seem to be in the same boat with different loyalties and no debate.

That man was a great. Canada should take the Queen off from the $20 and put Trudeau on it.

Of course Pearson and the Liberals were the largest players, but Douglas and the CCF were the most potent players. If it wasn't for Douglas popularizing the concept in Saskatchewan, and spreading the word that it was possible for all Canadians, gifted as he was with a preachers oratory skills, there would not have been the political will for Pearson to act upon.

Forget single-payer? You want something better than that? Suggestions?

I worked for a German company with a Canadian based facility and there were several who came to the US for more expedient care. You shouldn't be told that you have a heart blockage, but its going to be 3 months before you can receive an angioplasty. Same thing if you need a rotator cuff repaired after a sports injury. We can do so much better.

1) Remove millions of people from the line by denying care, American style

2) Simply fund the single-payer system appropriately so that market forces from low billing rates do not reduce service availability

The system itself is impeccable on paper, but it simply has to negotiate with finite resources. If you want to forget about this system completely, I don't know what the hell else you have in mind.

BTW, median wait time in my province for cardiac surgery is 38 days, not 3 months. That is very competitive with the states for elective or non-emergency cardiac procedures.

From my MSPs site:

and the procedure was performed 6 days later.. not to shabby I'd say.

Unlike the proposals currently on the table, where is can't pony up the dough, you simply go without treatment.

Like I say, we can do better and do not have to compromise.

Americans are entitled to the world. No compromise needed. Hopefully your magic system gives them that.

as another poster pointed out, the US has the benefit of looking at other systems and learning from their experiences. If we're not entitled to it, maybe we should just settle for our current system. :eyes:

Odds are, when all is said and done- that's what you're going to get- with a few neat sounding platitudes and new regulations without adequate enforcement methods. Much like you got with credit cards.

Do you have ANY progressive leanings whatsoever? If so, I haven't seen them. Is there any issue which you side with liberals over conservatives on? Do you actually vote for Democrats? I obviously don't read every post everyone ever makes, but it seems like on every major issue posted about, if there is a conservative position on the issue, you favor it. Am I missing something? Obviously, I don't agree on every issue with everyone on this board, but I rarely come across anybody who I've never agreed with on any issue.

Tell me, do you have any link about the 3 month wait for an angioplasty or is that anecdotal like 99% of all of the whining about 'wait times' in Canada that I see. And why aren't 'wait times' ever an issue in discussions about the US? How often can you get an appointment with your doctor the same day? Why was my wife told she would have to wait 2 months for a mammogram when she found a suspicious lump? Why did I have to tell a cancer patient she needed to wait 3 months because a needed doctor was unavailable for a Medicaid patient while his privately insured clients with less life-threatening needs went sooner? Also, even assuming wait times are occasionally an issue in Canada, if the Canadians spent 50% more than they currently spend on health care, do you think their waiting times would be reduced?

Just look at my posts.

Boy, did you pick the wrong day for this. I just had an ultrasound that I scheduled on Friday. I have to see a Dr. about once a week and I have zero trouble getting in. I've never in my life heard of anyone having to wait two months for a mammogram and you better look into getting a new Dr. ASAP.

Don't take my word for it.

http://canadaonline.about.com/od/healthcarewaittimes/Wait_Times_for_Health_Care_in_Canada.htm

They required that she use their provider and that provider was booked for 2 months. Luckily they had a cancellation and she was able to get in sooner, but it doesn't alter the fact that she was told 2 months when she first tried to get an appointment.

That website wasn't exactly informative. Of the links that worked, the data didn't seem at all unreasonable to me. In Manitoba, for cardiac surgery, for level 1 (critically ill) conditions the median wait time was 4 days. And for level 3 cases (non life threatening conditions, which are recommended to be done within 43-180 days), the median was 13 days. If you seriously believe you can get into surgery for a non-life-threatening surgery much quicker than 13 days in the US, you are dreaming. No doctor worth a damn has any unbooked time on his schedule for 2 weeks. I'm sure there are cases in Canada where the coincidence of a heavy case load and derth of doctors for one reason or another (vacations, lack of OR space, change in medical condition, etc) could cause a long delay, but those are the exception rather than the rule, and are as likely to happen here as in Canada. The difference is that Canada tracks that data, something which would be impossible in our system.

And everyone I know from Canada loves their system. I never hear them bitching about problems with their insurance company not paying their bills, losing their insurance because their company laid them off, finding a doctor/hospital that will take their insurance, or having to declare bankruptcy due to medical bills. They don't spend countless hours every year trying to decipher which prescription drug plan to buy, or which insurance plan to choose, or how much money to put in their Flex plan. They don't have to find a new doctor every time their company switches insurance companies.

You may like paying more money (50% more) for poorer results (higher infant mortality, lower life expectancy), but most DU'ers would happily switch to a Canadian system. And if wait times are really a concern for you, maybe we can add a 'Deluxe' service for folks like you which costs 50% more than the rest of us pay but guarantees no long delays for elective surgery. I, for one, can't wait for the day that the ER doesn't ask about your insurance before treating you and instead makes their decisions based on purely medical reasons.

I too am subject to using an insurance provider, but there are usual multiple providers in an area. My particular insurance requires me to pay 20% extra if I go outside the provider network, but I am welcome to do so.

How many Canadians do you know? I used to work for a company where a little less than half our workforce was Canadian. Its neither all good or all bad.

Wiki has condensed the information in those links a little better. You may want to continue reading up.

Of particular interest. "A March 2, 2004, article in the Canadian Medical Association Journal stated, "Saskatchewan is under fire for having the longest waiting time in the country for a diagnostic MRI—a whopping 22 months." <25> and "The New York Times quoted Dr. Brian Day as saying, "This is a country in which dogs can get a hip replacement in under a week and in which humans can wait two to three years."<26>"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada

Wow! From the article,

"He cited what he said was a particularly egregious example - U.S. advertisements in which a former head of the Canadian Medical Association promotes privatization and puts down Medicare.

Dr. Brian Day, a Canadian who operates his own private clinics, says in the ads that Canadian patients are languishing and dying on wait lists."


To repeat, Dr. Brian Day, a Canadian who OPERATES HIS OWN PRIVATE CLINICS....

Day's agenda is to promote PRIVATIZATION, another pig at the privatization trough, and you find him credible enough to cite. Again, wow!

Oh, and to use wiki as a credible source on a hot button political issue like this is quite foolish as well.

Wikipedia is. So you are against any private clinics? Why can't there be a public and private option like the UK? If the Canada's system provides such great healthcare, then why would there be any demand for private care at all?

they are a back door to dilution of our universal healthcare system and are a sorry attempt to bring back what you in the US have, gouging, for-profit HMOs, NO THANKS!. We have a public/private system but the private is for supplemental healthcare, dental, vision, private rooms, etc. All basic healthcare is under our universal healthcare system.

You cited him using wiki as a source so my point stands, actually both my points stand, wiki is useless as a source on hot button issues like this and Day is the kind of scum you have already running your HMOs, etc.


I do find it interesting that, for all your demands for perfection, that perfections seems to include a preference for a two-tier system, one for the poor (public) and one for the rich (private). I assume that given your question:

"So you are against any private clinics? Why can't there be a public and private option like the UK?"

Why is there a demand for private insurance if the healthcare system is so good? Also, you cherry picked quotes and did not bother responding to this one

"A March 2, 2004, article in the Canadian Medical Association Journal stated, "Saskatchewan is under fire for having the longest waiting time in the country for a diagnostic MRI—a whopping 22 months." <25>

I do not mind wikipedia as a source as long as its footnoted. Also, I have no prefences at all, but I think a better solution can be created than copying either the UK's or Canada's system.

nowhere. It certainly needs to be tweaked on a regular basis to ensure it is effective. Our system, however, is VERY good, it works very well for Canadians. Can it be made better, sure, which is why there was a major Commission struck and a report filed in 2000 with recommendations as to what can be improved.

As to your Saskatchewan cite, it would have been helpful had you provided a link to the Journal cited in wiki but, seeing as you did not, I did find the link and also the following, from the same article:

"We're having some challenges right now," said Nilson. "If you have an emergency situation, you can get an MRI right away. That is how our system works."

He said only elective procedures, including follow-up MRIs for cases already diagnosed, wait longer than about 7 months.

Saskatchewan's NDP government has steadfastly refused to allow private MRI clinics, fearing it would create 2-tiered health care."

As you can see, it refers to elective, NOT emergency situations and, notice as well, the push for private clinics, darn who would have guessed that with the screaming headline and all.

Do you think there should be private, for-profit options with any reform in the US or do you believe in what is being referred to single-payer public healthcare?

I wasn't saying the Canadian healthcare system was bad. I was merely saying that we don't need a carbon copy and can do better. What exactly is an elective MRI? I've had two rotator cuff repairs on the same shoulder and a wrist reconstruction. All do to sports injuries. Is that an emergency? I believe that if someone wants to pay extra to have private care for whatever reason is fine by me. Why would anyone be against that? They would still be paying taxes for UHC.

The Canada Health Act does not say there can be no private clinics. In fact you could open up a private hospital if you wanted!

It does not deny private clinics. In fact I go to my doctor in a private clinic owned by all the doctors in the clinic. Don't know where your information comes from. Certainly not from my province.

could charge no more than public care though. I also thought that the availability of private clinics varied by province as well. You undoubtedly no the system better than I do though.

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/pubs/cha-lcs/2008-cha-lcs-ar-ra/index-eng.php

The act is available at the above site. A pdf version is also available there. There is a section covering extra billing and user fees.

Each province operates their own system and receive funds according to their compliance with the act.

If someone, or group, wishes to operate outside the system there is nothing in the Act that prevents that. Although a provence may impose their own rules.

But I'm too lazy too look it up.

He's not from the burbs, though.

But I was a militant west-sider when I lived in Toronto, so I'm not hip to the ways of the Danforth.