England & Canada question

[Marigold2]

My friend a retired Dr is very much against Obama's plan for healthcare.
He sent me this, it was part of a larger e-mail.
In England anyone over 59 cannot receive heart repairs or stents or bypass because it is not covered as being too expensive and not needed.
My question is this
1) Is this statement true?
2) Those of you that live in England how would you rate your health care?
3) Those of you that live in Canada how would you rate your health care?
4) And last have either of you in these countries every been on a waiting list and if so for what and how long?
Thanks all, Monica

[phesina]

I have a 5th question:

Those of you in England or Canada, would you trade your health care system for one like ours?

[Nomilynn]

I would NEVER trade our health care system in Canada for what is in the USA! It isn't as bad as it's being made out, in my opinion. I had an elective surgery a couple years ago and I had to wait 4 months to have it done (I think). However, my boyfriend ended up needing emergency surgery on a Saturday a couple years back, and it didn't cost him a cent, other than his medical plan premiums (which his work pays as part of his benefit package).

I am now working at a place that also pays my premiums, and also pays 100% of my extended health, which means that I do not have to pay for any of my diabetic prescriptions.

As far as older people not getting service, I've not heard of that. It's my understanding that every situation is assesed and age is considered when determining treatments. My old co-worker's husband (who is over 60 but I'm not sure of his age) underwent quadruple by-pass surgery last year - it cost him nothing.

If I need to go and see my family doctor, the longest I've had to wait is maybe 2 or 3 days, because he's been on vacation. Usually I call ahead a couple of days because it's my schedule that's limited, not his.

I think it just depends on your situation. I know someone here who elected to have knee surgery (and paid for it out of pocket - $500) because she was in a lot of pain and would have had to wait 3 months. However, emergencies are not affected.

[Laura's Babies]

I have been wondering what they have to say about it too.


In England anyone over 59 cannot receive heart repairs or stents or bypass because it is not covered as being too expensive and not needed
That sounds exactly like what the people against the new health care program are saying will happen here.. I am still investigating the pro's and con's of it before I decide but so far, I have found a lot more against it and very little is being said to rebuff things like that being said.... THAT is what worries me! NO ONE is guaranteeing us things like that won't happen here. I find the bill (what I have read of it) is extremely vague and could go either way, depending on who reads it and how they interpret it..

I would love to hear from the people here who have that already.

I would like to ask them also, what does it cost them per year?

[Prairie Purrs]

Here's an article refuting that email, with footnotes listing the sources relied upon in the article:

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_it_true_that_persons_older_than.html

[caseysmom]

I have 7,000,000 in an account waiting for you, just send me $5000 and that 7,000,000 can be released....must be true its an email!

[Laura's Babies]

Prairie Purrs- I didn't get that email.. I saved that one to read later and the rebuff that is with it. Thanks..

[blue]

phesina should have started a new thread for her question. The first reply is way to early for a thread highjack.

Im not suprised to see the Annenberg Foundation backing up Obama's push for HCR. Im also not suprised that their sources for their rebultle only go back to 2008.

In all my years of being uninsured I, like our Canadian and English friends, have never been denied health care. Unlike our Canadian and English friends, I paid for it myself.

My friend broke his leg skiing in BC, he had to take a taxi from MT Whistler to the nearest hospital and that was the first of his dislike for the way BC aplies their health care.

My stepdad was born and raised in BC and has nothing good to say about the health care system there.

I know in Canada HC differs from province to province so maybe Sparks will chime in with her experience.

[DarntheCat]

I, having lived in the most (Advanced) Socialist country I know of, Germany, and some of the worst. I can say that IMHO Sociallized medicine is a good thing. There are positives and negatives to everything, to say that the average person will receive care the same as a Congressman or Senator is ridiculous in the extreme, however, not one time did I see an Emergency Room Administrator ask for Insurance Paperwork. Imeadiate care was the priority, even there you could seek out a Private Physician if you were disatisfied with the level of care that you were receiving from the Subsidized Health Care Provider. The down side was that the quality of care was not as high as I am used to, but it did seem the more serious the illness or injury the better the care.

[Louie and me]

My husband had a heart attack at age 45, followed by quadruple bypass surgery. At age 52 he required both hips be replaced and at age 58 and again at 61 he required angioplasti with stents because of continuing CAD. He is also diabetic. We in Ontario Canada are covered by the Ontario Health Insurance Plan and all of these procedures were covered by the plan with no cost to us. We are required to pay for drugs however fortunately we have an extended health plan from my former work that covers 80% of the cost and now that I am over 65, OHIP covers all the cost for my drugs also. I cannot imagine what our life would have been like without OHIP but I suspect my husband would not have survived.
There are indeed sometimes wait times for elective surgeries (we have never experienced any) but I have never heard of anyone having to wait for life saving or emergency surgery.

[ChrisH]

In England anyone over 59 cannot receive heart repairs or stents or bypass because it is not covered as being too expensive and not needed.
I presume when you write England you mean the whole of UK/British Isles, which consists of Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and England?

A simple answer to the question/statement. It is totally untrue. There is no cut off point where age is concerned.

[Laura's Babies]

This is what I had been hoping for! Positive answers about it instread of all the negative ones that are out there and to get them from the ones who have experienced it! THAT means a LOT! THANKS from me!

[Nomilynn]

Unlike our Canadian and English friends, I paid for it myself.

I do pay for my health care. It costs $54 a month, which is fortunately paid for by my employer (which has never happened for me before; I've always had to pay for it on my own before ) and I am completely covered for anything I need. Then, my extended health is also paid for by my employer. However, at my previous job, it was not - it was decucted of my paycheque every pay and I got a good rate through a group plan.

To say that we "don't pay" is actually incorrect. We do pay - but rather than having to may crazy amounts when an emergency happens, we pay a small amount all the time in order to be able to utilize the health care system when need be.

[kitten645]

I agree that it's nice to have a rational discussion. I generally immediately delete these types of emails because what irratates me more than anything is scare tactics. That's all that email is. Bravo to you for actually checking FACTS! I'm still sorting thru the information myself. I do think our system currently stinks. I also thing there is no perfect solution but things could certainly be improved. I was paying nearly $500 a month to be on Cobra when I lost my job a while back. THAT didn't last long. To justify $500 I'd have to move into the hospital! I think insurance companies and some doctors have been riding the gravy train too long and that they need to be held accountable.
Claudia

[blue]

I do pay for my health care. It costs $54 a month, which is fortunately paid for by my employer (which has never happened for me before; I've always had to pay for it on my own before ) and I am completely covered for anything I need. Then, my extended health is also paid for by my employer. However, at my previous job, it was not - it was decucted of my paycheque every pay and I got a good rate through a group plan.

To say that we "don't pay" is actually incorrect. We do pay - but rather than having to may crazy amounts when an emergency happens, we pay a small amount all the time in order to be able to utilize the health care system when need be.

Yes you did/do pay/paid for it. If your employer pays your premiums that is just like it being deducted from your pay check.

When I say I paid for it, I mean I paid for it out of my money because I have no insurance. I dont want .GOV deciding my insurance coverage. If I choose to work for a company that offers insurance benefits that is my and the companies business, not .GOV's.

I get more money per hour without health care premiums because the company isnt paying them and they arent being taken out of my paycheck.

When I worked in the warehouse, the insurance was a good deal and I took it. when I worked as an electritian it wasnt so I didnt have insurance.

So if its deducted or taxed, in your case its the same thing, you do pay for it. You also pay for allmost everybody elses.

[Nomilynn]

This is the first job I've had where my benefits are over and above my pay scale, so in actual fact, I am not paying anything for it this time. I'm paid a basic rate of pay, PLUS premiums and benefits. With my last job, my provincial health care came out of my own pocket - so I paid for it on my own.

I still would rather pay these premiums out of pocket than go to a system like that of the USA - without it, I would not have survived being laid off this past year because I would not have been able to pay for my prescriptions. As long as I pay my monthly premiums, I am covered and for me, at least, it's a way better system. :)

[blue]

Enough of the thread highjack, the OP's question has been answered.

[Lady's Human]

Whodathunkit? Blue's a moderator?

[Medusa]

Enough of the thread highjack, the OP's question has been answered.

Monica asked questions and people are answering. How is that highjacking? Seriously, blue, go have another helping of bacon. You're cranky.

[Edwina's Secretary]

Why just Canada and the UK? Germany, France, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, etc. etc. also have so-called Universal Healthcare.

It would be easier to list developed nations that do NOT have it.

In addition to asking how people like it...you should ask how well does it work. If Canada and UK deny medical care to the elderly - you would expect to see shorter life expectancy. The US is 24th in life expectancy - compared to UK at 14th and Canada at 12th.

In overall measurement of the quality of healthcare (infant mortality, etc.) the US ranks 37th.

Yet the only country that spends more on healthcare as a percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is the Marshall Islands.

You can read more about the US compared to other countries at World Health Organization http://www.who.int/en/

[Nomilynn]

Enough of the thread highjack, the OP's question has been answered.

I certainly hope this was not directed toward me, as my answers have been in response to the original questions and the ensuing responses to my posts. I think that counts as staying on topic.

I recently saw on the news that someone had hired a Canadian to come to the states and do an add against the Canadian Health System, because she had a bad experience and ended up having surgery in the US (I think she had to remortgage her house to pay for it). I think it is important to say that everyone has to be on top of their own health. If you don't like the answer from your own doctor, go see another one. That is another advantage to this system - you can see whatever doctor you want, anywhere in the province, and it doesn't cost you anything to do it and get 2nd opinions.

[Cataholic]

I pay for health insurance. I just paid $133 for a 20 day supply of antibiotics for J, another sinus infection. Thank GOD that the ENT didn't require a office visit ($238), and just called in the prescription. With my health insurance, the company pays the first $2000. I pay the next $3000. LOL. AND I pay the premiums. For what? Ever have a child need therapy? J's speech is $178 a week. Do the math...I am paying for the cruddiest coverage.

We need a change to our health care system. It has to start with those dirty words- insurance companies.

[phesina]

I'm the evil hijacker, because after Marigold posted her questions about the English and Canadian systems, I also asked our British and Canadian friends (and, for that matter, those of other countries with national health plans) whether they'd rather have a system like ours.

I certainly wasn't trying to "hijack" any discussion, which I'm not sure what that means but I gather it implies I'm trying to steer it towards a particular point of view. I'm not, but I would also like facts and honest answers pro and con regarding the different systems, which it seemed to me was what Marigold was looking for.

This is a HUGE issue in our country right now, and I would like to know as much as I can on just what we are talking about here and what might be at stake.. based on FACTS, not on lies, which the e-mail Marigold got appears to be full of and which are being disseminated all around.

What ARE the down-sides of national health care systems? (I already have pretty good ideas of the down-sides of ours.)

Are there many people in those countries who would prefer a system like ours? And if so, do you have actual experience of ours, or if not, what do you hear about it or know about it in your country?


In all my years of being uninsured I, like our Canadian and English friends, have never been denied health care. Unlike our Canadian and English friends, I paid for it myself.

Blue, how many thousands and thousands of dollars are you talking about here? Was this health care for anything like lengthy hospitalizations or extensive surgery or intensive-care-unit stays or treatment for degenerative diseases? And I take it that if you ever are faced with such, you'll be able to pay for it yourself?


My stepdad was born and raised in BC and has nothing good to say about the health care system there.

I know in Canada HC differs from province to province so maybe Sparks will chime in with her experience.

Blue, I would really like to hear more about what your stepdad does not like about the Canadian system. Does he live in this country now? If so, I'd like to hear his thoughts on our system and why he thinks it is better. Thank you.

And I hope that Sparks WILL contribute to this discussion, since she has lived with both systems and will be able to speak with experience about the differences and how they have affected the lives of her and her family.

[Marigold2]

Thank you all for the info which I am passing on to my friend Dr. Dave. As a retired physian he is much interested in everyone's views from around the world. PT is full of intelligent people with valid opinions well thought out.
I lived in Germany over 30 years ago and loved their health care system. I had my first born there.
Some ways I feel that America can cut health care cuts were being done there so many years ago.
For instance.
1) We were four to a room
2) No phone
3) No TV
4) Simple yet good meals.
5) No bathroom, it was down the hall and shared by all on that floor.
6) No visitors in room, we went to a common area.
7) Hospital stay 30 years ago 9 days
8) My cost ZERO.
If we had this instead of private rooms that looked like plush hotels, cable, phone, and all the extras we could save millions of dollars.
I would like to hear everyone's thoughts.
And thanks again to all the intelligent PT people, that includes Blue Too.:D

[Laura's Babies]

I would love to see more people answer and hear more! Is there anybody else out there?

[emily_the_spoiled]

As someone who was born in Canada, lived there for over 30 years, and was a practicing health care professional before moving to the USA I have had experience in both systems. (I no longer practice in the US but I do research into access and quality of care in the US.)

While neither system is "perfect" neither are they totally "wrong". Both of them can not continue on the development path that they are currently on ... it is unsustainable because of the expense.

Yes there are waiting lists in Canada, where you end up on the list depends upon how sick you are. For example, a couple of years ago my 40 yo BIL ended up in the hospital because he collapsed at home (in Canada). The first thing they did was a MRI and it turns out he had a beign tumour and they operated that night (he is fine today). If he had gone into the MD and said he had a headache he would not have received the MRI or emergency surgery, but then again it is unlikely he would have received an MRI here either. He might have been put on a waiting list if he had chronic headaches of unknown origin, but he was sick enough to skip to the top of the list and receive the care he needed with no copayments or deductibles.

If he had been in the US, he would have also received immediate care if he was admitted into the hospital, but he likely would not have had insurance because he is a real estate agent. This means that he would have had to pay the full cost of everything. Even if he did have insurance he would have copayments or deductibles.

In Canada you wait based on how ill you are, while in the US you wait based on how good your insurance is or how much money you have. Which is fair?

[Nomilynn]

In Canada you wait based on how ill you are, while in the US you wait based on how good your insurance is or how much money you have. Which is fair?

Excellent post!

This pretty much sums up what I meant about people taking charge of their own health. Just because the doctor tells you you are fine, doesn't mean that you are, and it is up to everyone to be persistant and make someone listen when they say they don't feel "right" - I am lucky that I have such a great doctor in BC, he will listen to whatever I need. I think it might be the people who don't want to "be a bother" that end up suffering. My grandmother was like this - when she died we found out that her doctor suspected she might have ovarian cancer, but she hadn't told him until about 6 months from when she noticed symptoms! It's so important to be really pro-active in your own care.

[Edwina's Secretary]

As I read the editorials in this morning's papers I was again struck by the focus on comparing healthcare in the US to healthcare in Canada and the UK. Why are all the other countries with universal healthcare ignored?

Isn't it possible we could learn things - good and bad - if we broadened the scope?

[Laura's Babies]

Why are all the other countries with universal healthcare ignored?


I don't think they are being ignored, it is just that we don't know what countries have universal healthcare. The ones mentioned here are the the only ones we hear about here in the USA.

We would love hearing from them ALL! Pros and cons.. If you can add anything, we would love to hear from you too! We are just looking for answers so we can make an informed decision..

[blue]

I certainly hope this was not directed toward me.

No it wasnt.


I'm the evil hijacker, because after Marigold posted her questions about the English and Canadian systems, I also asked our British and Canadian friends (and, for that matter, those of other countries with national health plans) whether they'd rather have a system like ours.

Never called you evil, only that it should be a different thread. The OP asked for opinions of their health care systems, not a comparison of theirs to ours. I really would have liked to have seen how the English, Canadians, Germans, and other socialist countries rated their systems, without comparing them to other countries.


I certainly wasn't trying to "hijack" any discussion, which I'm not sure what that means but I gather it implies I'm trying to steer it towards a particular point of view. I'm not, but I would also like facts and honest answers pro and con regarding the different systems, which it seemed to me was what Marigold was looking for.

I dont think you meant to steer the discussion in any way but your question had the unintended consequence of doing so and it did.

The rest of your questions Ill gladly answer in another thread.

[Lady's Human]

I think the reason we hear about Canada and the UK while talking about health care is that we can relate to those countries easily.

On the surface we're very similar.

[Edwina's Secretary]

I'd like to know more about the system in France - as they have the highest quality healthcare.

Anyone know?

[blue]

Didnt Michael Moore allready make the comparisons?

With lies, half truths, and outright deceptions?

[blue]

Whodathunkit? Blue's a moderator?

I got banned from the last site I was a moderator on.

The OP's 4 questions could have been answerred more easily without the 5th question.

No socialist health care system, that I know of, says anybody over a certain age is cut of from certain procedures. There are systems that take age into account regaurding certain procedures.

IE. someone who is 50 will get a heart stint before someone who is 65. Someone who is 45 will get a hip replacement before an 78 year old. And yes I pulled those numbers out of the air.

[Killearn Kitties]

I didn’t respond to this thread originally, because by the time I saw it Prairie Purrs had already posted the link refuting the claims of the email.

I can’t compare the two systems because I have no experience of the American one, nor do I know what changes are being proposed. It seems though that some people are interested in hearing people’s experience with other systems. Everybody here is entitled to healthcare through the NHS (National Health Service) funded through taxation. The individual does not pay for operations, treatment, hospital clinic, or doctor’s appointments. There is a prescription charge if you require medication. I think it is currently running around £5 or so. My father-in-law suffers from rheumatoid arthritis and gets two carrier bags worth of pills at a time, poor man. As a pensioner, he is exempt from prescription charges. In fact the Scottish Government aims to abolish prescription charges altogether by 2011.

In addition to that, I have private healthcare insurance as a benefit through my work, which I used once. The details are just too disgusting to recount here, but basically I had had an ear infection and the eardrum had perforated, so I was supposed to keep water away from inside the ear. I was going on holiday a couple of months later and wanted to be able to swim and dive, so the doctor requested an appointment from an ear specialist at a hospital clinic. When my appointment came through it was after my holiday – clearly a bit of gunge in the ear is not a life-threatening condition – so I got a private appointment for the following week instead.

It seems to me that when people have moans about the health service, they are aimed at the changes and cost-cutting measures, but not at the concept of universal healthcare itself. The system is in financial crisis though, and it is tinkered with constantly in an attempt keep costs down. Britain faces the same problems of an ageing population that other similar countries face.

[Prairie Purrs]

Just as an illustration of the woeful lack of knowledge on the part of some of the people who are opining on the health care issue, here's a quote from "Investor's Business Daily": (http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=333933006516877)


People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn't have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless.

I'm sure that would come as a surprise to Mr. Hawking, who was born in Oxford, England, and is a professor at the University of Cambridge. He currently is recovering from a recent illness, after treatment at a National Health Service hospital.

[Medusa]

I emailed my friend who lives in England and asked about the quality of care there as opposed to here. I met her in Sedona, AZ and she was diagnosed w/anal cancer and was treated in the U.S. for it. In the second paragraph she answered my question about long waits to be seen by a doctor. Here is her email back to me that I copied and pasted:

"hey Mary, well the quality of care is the same the only difference is that in USA the docs order all kinds of tests like CT MRI etc cos the insurance company picking up the bill whereas here its the NHS so they are reluctant to go on a fishing expedition and only order the appropriate test they feel is needed. The one superior thing here is aftercare once you are released from hospital there is another side to the NHS which is based in the community we call them district nurses and community doc (GPs) they come round (Nurses) once or twice a day depending on your circumstances to administer any care such as drugs/ wound care etc and then there the Carers who come round to do your personal care such as washing you etc. As well as all that there are national charities that specialise in illnesses (such as mine Marie Curie Cancer) who supply nurses for that specific illness and my charity does this only at night so whoever is looking after you can go to bed and get some rest. There are different ones for every illness imagineable and they operate free of charge as well.
So I would have to say that over here is much better as it is more specialised in areas and of course it is all free."

"No there are people that have this concept that you have to wait, it used to be the case before this government changed it now if you need say a hip replacement you have to be seen by I think it is 2 months or something like that, age is not an issue, because it is one party that has improved it the oppositiion party try to manipulate the figures, you know how it is with politics. They may have had their operations a while ago when they did have to wait. I went down to my docs office the other day Thursday and got an appoiuntment for the next day. They make the referral to the specialist and then you get a letter from them telling you when and it has to be within a certain time frame or if they cant fit you in within that then they have to offer you a private specialist and the NHS picks up the bill"

[Laura's Babies]

I'd like to know more about the system in France - as they have the highest quality healthcare.

Those answers could be right here, depending on what it is you want to know.
http://www.soulcast.com/post/show/110209/Medical-Care-in-America-versus-France,-Canada,-and-England

[Medusa]

My concern is that for every link that we read for health ins. reform, we can read a link that's against it. For every person that says socialized medicine is good, there's another person who says it isn't. How are we supposed to decide for ourselves? Plus, if the bill is 1000+ pages that hasn't even been read or understood, how could they possibly implement it? My biggest gut feeling tells me that if they're trying to rush it through, it's probably w/good reason and not in our favor.

[Killearn Kitties]

My concern is that for every link that we read for health ins. reform, we can read a link that's against it. For every person that says socialized medicine is good, there's another person who says it isn't. How are we supposed to decide for ourselves?
I feel that this can be said about every political issue on the planet. There are a lot of vested interests and they all have their own agenda.

[Edwina's Secretary]

Those answers could be right here, depending on what it is you want to know.
http://www.soulcast.com/post/show/110209/Medical-Care-in-America-versus-France,-Canada,-and-England

Thank you Laura. That is VERY informative. And again leads me to ask...why aren't these facts a part of the discussion?

[Killearn Kitties]

Just as an illustration of the woeful lack of knowledge on the part of some of the people who are opining on the health care issue, here's a quote from "Investor's Business Daily": (http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=333933006516877)
I'm sure that would come as a surprise to Mr. Hawking, who was born in Oxford, England, and is a professor at the University of Cambridge. He currently is recovering from a recent illness, after treatment at a National Health Service hospital.

That just beggars belief.

[smokey the elder]

There was an article with a chart showing the largest contributors to waste in American health care. One of the largest bars on this chart was excessive testing. (I can't remember what the other one was; I need to go dig around for the link to the article.) The excessive testing may be linked to the tort law in this country; people tend to like to sue. Tort reform may need to be coupled to health care reform in order to help reduce this one source of waste.

Here's just one link, by Price Waterhouse Coopers, which cited excessive testing as the #1 waste source. Americans' life style choices were #3. http://www.pwc.com/us/en/healthcare/publications/the-price-of-excess.jhtml

[Medusa]

I feel that this can be said about every political issue on the planet. There are a lot of vested interests and they all have their own agenda.

I don't disagree except for what I said in the rest of my post.

[Randi]

What KK and Medusa's friend described, is pretty much how it works in Denmark too. There can be short waiting lists for things that are not life threatening, like a hip operation. If the patient requires immediate attention, he/she will be referred to a private hospital and NHS will pay the bill.

Like in UK, everybody here is entitled to healthcare through the NHS (National Health Service) funded through taxation. The individual does not pay for operations, treatment, hospital clinic, or doctor’s appointments. However, we do pay for dentist treatment.

If someone need a lot of prescription medicine, they pay the full amount for it the first time, and after that, the amount is deducted with a certain percentage for the following purchases for one year, so that you pay less and less. It starts all over again after a year.

[Edwina's Secretary]

That just beggars belief.

It is amazing the "untruths" some people are willing to spread to advance their political agenda. Another example of an "untruth".....

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (Aug. 7) -- Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin called President Barack Obama's health plan "downright evil" Friday in her first online comments since leaving office, saying in a Facebook posting that he would create a "death panel" that would deny care to the neediest Americans.
"The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care," the former Republican vice presidential candidate wrote.

Death Panels???? Suggesting that strikes me as ugly and evil! And of course, is not true.

[CultureJunky]

As far as I'm aware, that statement is untrue, I have never heard of that in Britain. I live in Wales and we have slight differences but generally the health care system is more or less the same in Wales, England and Scotland.
My husbands grandmother had a heart bypass operation at the age of 78 and that was in England, about 10 years ago.
Whenever something is deemed to expensive it always causes uproar in Britain because that's what we pay our National Insurance contribution for in your wages (salary).
I have to admit the thought of going to the doctor or hospital and paying for it is really weird! I can't imagine having to do that!
Also even if the British government tried to bring things like that in, the public would go ape.

[Laura's Babies]

That is VERY informative. And again leads me to ask...why aren't these facts a part of the discussion?

At first we panic... that nasty ole word "CHANGE".. I paniced too, then I wanted to dig deeper than what information is being passed around BY the paniced. Like I said before, what I have read of the bill is so vague that people interpret it different.

The hurried way they are trying to pass it is what is panicing everybody. It needs to be fully explained in every day terms and just give us time to do some investigating to satisfy ourselves that it is not/or really is, something to be afraid of. WHAT IS THE RUSH? We have done it our way this long, give us time to read it, investigate it and them have someone to explain it, there is no need to hurry and shove it down anyones throat..

What I want to see is a debate on TV like the presidential debates, THAT is what I think they need to do to satisfy people and answer questions that people have.... FOR ALL to see! If there is nothing to hide... why not?

[mvm417]

Walter Annenberg & wife Leonore were ardent, staunch lifelong Republicans. Annenberg helped get Nixon elected president and Nixon then appointed Annenberg as Amb. to London (the most prestigious ambassadorship). Annenbergs were great friends of the Reagans and often socialized with them - most notablly New Year's Eves (plural "eves"). The couples were perhaps best friends. Leonore was appointed by Reagan as the State Dept. Chief of Protocol.

The Annenberg Foundation concentrates much of its grants on education.

Google: England 59 yrs no heart repairs stents bypass
and note about 10 sites COMPLETELY refuting that canard about England not allowing those over 59 years to have these heart procedures. Sites cite their sources for the information. Note also that that weird email making the rounds telling us all that England doesn't allow these heart procedures gives no sources for its statements and the originator is anonymous. When I received that email, I thought it was a joke. And indeed it is.