US Bishops Support Universal Health Care [2009-07-21] [Zenit]

[Catholic_Press]

Appeal for Reforms That Respect Life

WASHINGTON, D.C., JULY 21, 2009 (Zenit.org).- The U.S. bishops’ conference is urging lawmakers to reform the health care system in order to make it accessible and affordable for all, and respectful of human life.

The conference affirmed this in a July 17 letter to U.S. congressmen, signed by the chairman of the Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre, New York.

The letter, released to the public today, was written to present the conference’s policy priorities to all Senators and House Representatives.

More…

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Okay Catholics - now its clear in black and white: Catholics must support Obama’s health care plan. Time for the argueing to end.

 

[andrewagill]

Interesting that Bishop Murphy comes from New York.

New York passed a law that requires health insurance to have coverage for birth control. With the popularity of the Hyde Amendment and the desire to keep costs low, it’s likely that this would be a way to eliminate insurance coverage for abortion in NY.

 

[o_mlly]

Okay Catholics - now its clear in black and white: Catholics must support Obama’s health care plan. Time for the argueing to end.

I think not. The only recent post I could find is quoted below. The USCCB simply reiterated its long-standing principles for a fair and just health care system reform. How well the particular bill in Congress meets those objectives is beyond the good bishops wisdom. As an aside, I do not believe President Obama has offered us his plan yet.)

"U.S. Bishops Urge Congress to Observe Respect for Life, Access for All in Health Care Legislation

WASHINGTON—“Genuine health care reform that protects the life and dignity of all is a moral imperative and a vital national obligation,” said Bishop William F. Murphy of Rockville Centre, N.Y., as he outlined the policy priorities of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) on the issue of health care in a July 17 letter to Congress. The letter supported efforts to pass health care reform, but warned against inclusion of abortion.

“Writing on behalf of the bishops as chairman of their Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, Bishop Murphy said the bishops have advocated comprehensive health care reform for decades and recommended four criteria for fair and just health care reform: respect for human life and dignity, access for all, pluralism and equitable costs.”
usccb.org/news/

Peace,
O’Malley

 

[Janet_S]

Both parties are for health care reform, so that is not the issue.

The problem with the Obama plan is that no one (not even he) knows what is in it, yet there is an urgent plea to pass it without delay. Very stupid move in my opinion. It would have been wiser for him to prepare a plan, educate people about it, and then push to enact it.

His own website is encouraging people to support him, but it gives virtually no information about his health care plan:

barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

At the top of his website, we aren’t bothered with the details, but are asked to “believe.”

I hope everyone, even his diehard supporters, encourage their legislators to slow down and act with caution.

 

[Brendan]

Okay Catholics - now its clear in black and white: Catholics must support Obama’s health care plan. Time for the argueing to end.

No, it doesn’t. First of all, it says that health reform must exclude abortion coverage, Obama’s proposal does not meet that criteria. So far, Obama and Pelosi have resisted any attempts to exclude abortion coverage.

Secondly, it says that it must be “fair and just”, that is fine, but what exactly constitutes fairness and justice.

Access to food and shelter must be fair and just too. But does that mean that the government must own and operate all the grocery stores and realtor offices?

Does it mean that someone being able to afford steak while another can only afford hamburger is unjust?

And besides, nothing Obama is proposing qualifies as universal health care. It cannot until abortion is made illegal. While abotion remains legal, an entire segment of the population (the unborn) is deliberately excluded from healthcare. That rules out this being ‘unversal’ by definition.

 

[jean29]

Appeal for Reforms That Respect Life

WASHINGTON, D.C., JULY 21, 2009 (Zenit.org).- The U.S. bishops’ conference is urging lawmakers to reform the health care system in order to make it accessible and affordable for all, and respectful of human life.

The conference affirmed this in a July 17 letter to U.S. congressmen, signed by the chairman of the Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre, New York.

The letter, released to the public today, was written to present the conference’s policy priorities to all Senators and House Representatives.

More…

National Health Care has not worked in other countries, England, Canada. Europe. They , the patients, go on a waiting list to get the care they need. Don’t sign this.
Taxes will go out of sight. who do you think will pay for this? Tax-Payers!

jean

 

[jean29]

Both parties are for health care reform, so that is not the issue.

The problem with the Obama plan is that no one (not even he) knows what is in it, yet there is an urgent plea to pass it without delay. Very stupid move in my opinion. It would have been wiser for him to prepare a plan, educate people about it, and then push to enact it.

His own website is encouraging people to support him, but it gives virtually no information about his health care plan:

barackobama.com/issues/healthcare/

At the top of his website, we aren’t bothered with the details, but are asked to “believe.”

I hope everyone, even his diehard supporters, encourage their legislators to slow down and act with caution.

This won’t get through that fast. Hang unto to your purses. If this does pass you will pay for it. “Taxes!” Up. Up and Away! Socialized Medicine.

jean

 

[Soutane]

National Health Care has not worked in other countries, England, Canada. Europe. They , the patients, go on a waiting list to get the care they need. Don’t sign this.
Taxes will go out of sight. who do you think will pay for this? Tax-Payers!

jean

It certainly has worked and IS working in Canada.There are some waiting lists for SOME things;however,there is a triage system wwhere the most in need is treated first but ALL are treated not just the fortunate 70%(as in the U.S.).Canada also spends less of its GDP on health care yet 100% are covered.
Canadians live on average 2.5 years longer than Americans and enjoy on average better health.As we both come from the same stock the difference in life expectancy and health logically is attributable to universal health care.
I agree with ONE part of your statement-Universal Health Care is not free-the taxpayer pays for it.I’ll put up with expensive beer in order to have a health care system that works for all.On the other hand we removed the profit takers from the equation-the insurance companies and HMOs who suck out a substantial portion of the health care dollar.

I might have to wait for a knee replacement but I’ll get one and so will the poor person.No wonder the U.S.Bishops support universal health care.

 

[josephdavid]

Interesting that Bishop Murphy comes from New York.

New York passed a law that requires health insurance to have coverage for birth control. With the popularity of the Hyde Amendment and the desire to keep costs low, it’s likely that this would be a way to eliminate insurance coverage for abortion in NY.

Just like 2002 and 2004 when Bush and Republican held congress OK funding for chemical abortions. No significant difference regardless of party in control. Sadly the Democrats are more blatent about it.

 

[josephdavid]

It certainly has worked and IS working in Canada.There are some waiting lists for SOME things;however,there is a triage system wwhere the most in need is treated first but ALL are treated not just the fortunate 70%(as in the U.S.).Canada also spends less of its GDP on health care yet 100% are covered.
Canadians live on average 2.5 years longer than Americans and enjoy on average better health.As we both come from the same stock the difference in life expectancy and health logically is attributable to universal health care.
I agree with ONE part of your statement-Universal Health Care is not free-the taxpayer pays for it.I’ll put up with expensive beer in order to have a health care system that works for all.On the other hand we removed the profit takers from the equation-the insurance companies and HMOs who suck out a substantial portion of the health care dollar.

I might have to wait for a knee replacement but I’ll get one and so will the poor person.No wonder the U.S.Bishops support universal health care.

In regards to the life average of Canadians… Please do not forget the infant mortality rate is lower in Canada, Japan, German, France, UK.

 

[josephdavid]

This won’t get through that fast. Hang unto to your purses. If this does pass you will pay for it. “Taxes!” Up. Up and Away! Socialized Medicine.

jean

Bring it on. I am sure my taxes that go to equal and affordable healthcare will be far less than my $1500 / mo premimum that denies coverage to my wife because of a pre-existing conditon.

 

[josephdavid]

National Health Care has not worked in other countries, England, Canada. Europe. They , the patients, go on a waiting list to get the care they need. Don’t sign this.
Taxes will go out of sight. who do you think will pay for this? Tax-Payers!

jean

Sorry that myth has been debunked too many times.

Or are those countries getting rid of their universal healthcare? Oh wait… no they are not. In fact they are always improving the imperfections, but not getting rid of it.

 

[andrewagill]

National Health Care has not worked in other countries, England, Canada. Europe. They , the patients, go on a waiting list to get the care they need. Don’t sign this.
Taxes will go out of sight. who do you think will pay for this? Tax-Payers!

It clearly has not worked in Canada, but if you look at health outcomes, the US is now ranking much lower than many other countries in the Western World. We’re #42 in life expectancy.

Our health care system is broken. We give tax breaks and government incentives to corporations who turn around and try to make sure that we don’t get any help when we do get sick.

We already have socialized medicine–the government dictates what is or is not a health care policy, and forces employers to buy into them.

I don’t like socialized medicine and I think it’s suboptimal, but we already have socialized medicine in the form of Blue Cross, Aetna, HealthAmerica, and all the corporations that benefit from the current government favoritism. What universal health care would do is add oversight to the system. Given how bad the current system is, I doubt universal health care could be much worse.

 

[josephdavid]

It clearly has not worked in Canada, but if you look at health outcomes, the US is now ranking much lower than many other countries in the Western World. We’re #42 in life expectancy.

Our health care system is broken. We give tax breaks and government incentives to corporations who turn around and try to make sure that we don’t get any help when we do get sick.

We already have socialized medicine–the government dictates what is or is not a health care policy, and forces employers to buy into them.

I don’t like socialized medicine and I think it’s suboptimal, but we already have socialized medicine in the form of Blue Cross, Aetna, HealthAmerica, and all the corporations that benefit from the current government favoritism. What universal health care would do is add oversight to the system. Given how bad the current system is, I doubt universal health care could be much worse.

You make some good points. However, it has worked in Canada. It is not perfect but they embrace their health care system.

In fact when CBC has a national wide poll to vote for the Greatest Canadian, thousands voted for Tommy Douglas. Mr. Douglas was a politician considered the father of Canadas current health care system.

 

[Soutane]

It clearly has not worked in Canada, but if you look at health outcomes, the US is now ranking much lower than many other countries in the Western World. We’re #42 in life expectancy.

Our health care system is broken. We give tax breaks and government incentives to corporations who turn around and try to make sure that we don’t get any help when we do get sick.

We already have socialized medicine–the government dictates what is or is not a health care policy, and forces employers to buy into them.

I don’t like socialized medicine and I think it’s suboptimal, but we already have socialized medicine in the form of Blue Cross, Aetna, HealthAmerica, and all the corporations that benefit from the current government favoritism. What universal health care would do is add oversight to the system. Given how bad the current system is, I doubt universal health care could be much worse.

"It certainly has worked and IS working in Canada.There are some waiting lists for SOME things;however,there is a triage system wwhere the most in need is treated first but ALL are treated not just the fortunate 70%(as in the U.S.).Canada also spends less of its GDP on health care yet 100% are covered.
Canadians live on average 2.5 years longer than Americans and enjoy on average better health.As we both come from the same stock the difference in life expectancy and health logically is attributable to universal health care.
I agree with ONE part of your statement-Universal Health Care is not free-the taxpayer pays for it.I’ll put up with expensive beer in order to have a health care system that works for all.On the other hand we removed the profit takers from the equation-the insurance companies and HMOs who suck out a substantial portion of the health care dollar.

I might have to wait for a knee replacement but I’ll get one and so will the poor person.No wonder the U.S.Bishops support universal health care."

Sorry to quote myself but it CLEARLY is working.2.5 years greater life expectancy,enjoyment of greater health,lower infant mortality rates(thanks,JosephDavid ! ),and a system that is open to even the poorest of the poor,cannot be argued with.Why do people repeat myths that have no basis in fact?Could it be because of the anti-universal health care propaganda that is emmanating from threatened vested interests like 3rd party profit suckers(insurance companies who care only for their bottom line and not your bottoms?)_____________

 

[estesbob]

In regards to the life average of Canadians… Please do not forget the infant mortality rate is lower in Canada, Japan, German, France, UK.

A bogus stastic based on the difference between the way the United States and these countries report pre-mature births. Per the CBO

SUMMARY
In the United States–as in other industrialized countries–the infant mortality rate has declined dramatically during this century. Yet, despite the high quality and widespread availability of neonatal intensive care technology in this country, the infant mortality rate remains higher than that of many developed nations.
Problems of definition and measurement, however, hamper cross-national comparisons of health statistics. Alternative measures of infant mortality may provide better information but cannot completely compensate for differences among countries in the overall rates of reporting of adverse pregnancy outcomes.** For example, very premature births are more likely to be included in birth and mortality statistics in the United States than in several other industrialized countries that have lower infant mortality rates. **

 

[josephdavid]

Ladies and Gentleman I present recently voted “The Greatest Canadian” Tommy Douglas:

youtube.com/watch?v=C2oUInTUlAM&feature=related

youtube.com/watch?v=vfEFwbRBupk&feature=related

 

[estesbob]

Ladies and Gentleman I present recently voted “The Greatest Canadian” Tommy Douglas:

youtube.com/watch?v=C2oUInTUlAM&feature=related

youtube.com/watch?v=vfEFwbRBupk&feature=related

You idolize the man who institutionalzed taxpayer funded abortion on demand in Canada?

 

[Soutane]

A bogus stastic based on the difference between the way the United States and these countries report pre-mature births. Per the CBO

SUMMARY
In the United States–as in other industrialized countries–the infant mortality rate has declined dramatically during this century. Yet, despite the high quality and widespread availability of neonatal intensive care technology in this country, the infant mortality rate remains higher than that of many developed nations.
Problems of definition and measurement, however, hamper cross-national comparisons of health statistics. Alternative measures of infant mortality may provide better information but cannot completely compensate for differences among countries in the overall rates of reporting of adverse pregnancy outcomes.** For example, very premature births are more likely to be included in birth and mortality statistics in the United States than in several other industrialized countries that have lower infant mortality rates. **

All that that proves is that there is no universality in capturing the raw data for this PARTICULAR statistic.It certainly does NOT prove that the statistic itself nor JosephDavid’s contention itself is “bogus”.