Healthcare Reform passes in the USA! Welcome to the First World America!
 

I would like to congradulate all the Americans on this site reguarding the passing of the Health Care bill in the Senate last night. The fact that the worlds richest and most powerful country has gone so long without a universal healcare system has always astounded me. Congradulations, and welcome to the First World America!:D

Health insurance still a work in progress
 

The house or representatives (400 + politicians) passed the bill last night now our Senate (100 more politicians) still need to vote and pass the changes the house of reps want to our new insurance reform so it ain't done yet.

It's only a start ...
 

That's true, we ain't there yet, but the Republican facade and lies are finally falling apart. Their massive lies about this bill are being revealed.
I feel momentum is now with the Bill for passage in the Senate.

Sadly, this is not even close to a "Universal" health care plan. The Insurance companies will get a huge boost from this and there are a thousand things wrong with this "half way measure" of a bill. Just listen to Dennis Kuscinitch (D- Ohio)

The idea that the Immoral Religious Right hypocrites have led the phony Tea Party movement (and Anti-women's rights groups) in resisting this legislation is outrageous. Many in our country have forgotten one of the tenants of our constitution: Separation of Church and State.

Keep the frickin' religious hypocrisy out of my govt. thank you!

So this is a very rough beginning and a lot of work needs to be done to really make this reform be effective and really save BIG MONEY to tax payers. As long as the insurance companies are still involved and allowed to be middle men in all this, we've got problems and insurance will still cost us way more than it should. Profits and Health care do not go together, IMO.

What everyone should know is that virtually the entire Republican party are on the take from HUGE insurance and drug company interests. I'm hoping some of these guys will be going to jail for acting as direct pawns of the Insurance lobby in illegal ways.

I question the word "richest". It all depends how you cut the cake of national wealth. The US is about (6th from the top of a list which places Canada, Sweden, Norway ,denmark etc ahead of the US. This is because wealth in the US is skewed heavily towards the few who already have too much. Bush and his gang increased the imbalance of course.

Blair etc did the same in the UK.

Yeah, that's not a partisan nor sheep-like statement. Quit drinkin' the Kool aid.

How exactly is it going to 'save' me money by offering a limited resource to everyone?

Needless to say, I am deeply upset that this monstrosity passed. In the end the gov't is going to screw it up. I'm going to have less choice, poorer quality, and pay quite a bit more for healthcare. Sounds just wonderful.:thumbdown:

I'm curious, what do you base this analisis on? Are you one of the 30,000,000 people in the US that don't have health insurance?

LONG LIVE THE NHS.

don't break bones in the U.S as this costs a small fortune. I bought health insurance for the states thank me, Not God (still waiting for him to prove his/her existance to me and as for his son what a con man,and his con has been going on for 2000 years.) health care cost my insurance company $45,000 just for a broken leg. Same injury in the uk cost me nothing as everybody is entitled to the same health care for free.. wake up america.you dont live in the land of the free. the uk is free, well nearly.

Actually, as a tourist you should not have to pay a thing in the USA. This is part of the problem with our system.

As a tourist, if you are hurt, take all the care you can get, sign anything they ask you to. Tell them you have NO MONEY, no Credit card, no nothing.
DO NOT give them your credit card!

Then, after all the surguries, hospital stays and drugs and various treatments .... you just leave. And continue your trip but don't plan on settling in the USA. :rofl:

The problems start when you are a US resident with a job. Then they can come after you legally. If you simply go back to the UK, they have no recourse no matter what you've signed or promised to pay. They cannot collect. (unless you've given them your credit card or national health number)

Unfortunately Millions do exactly this and at the elevated emergency room rates the costs for folks who can't pay are written off and the govt. ends up covering it. What this does is allow insurance companies, drug companies and hospitals to RAISE rates even higher, making it impossible for average working people to afford any insurance at all.

Once everyone is covered costs will come down, more preventative care
(so fewer sick people) and everyone participates. Rip off rates can be curtailed and Unnecessary procedures can be reduced. Insurance companies are simply leeches in this system. No place for them, no need for them. No other country in the world operates this way. It's insane.

Whatever statement or comparison you are going for here makes no sense. Yeah, an injury in the UK shouldn't cost you anything - you have the NHS. The same injury in the US will incur a cost because it's a different freakin' country.

Who gives a shit if it cost your insurance company $45k? That is why you have insurance. You are betting something will happen to you, you want protection, and pay a premium. The insurance company is betting something won't happen to you and they will get to keep your premium.

What is not fair in this deal?

never take the word of insurance as a gamble.

Any visitor to the U.K from any where in the world gets free health care as a couresty.

There is no cost to how much it will cost to save your life in the rest of the first world. except in america where the rules are can you afford to live and do you have the right health insurance. If not you are goig to die in that country..... Sorry

:offtopic: My sister is an E M nurse in the U.S and no matter what the casualties condition they are asked to sign/fill in and have to ask if they have health insurance. If they have they get treated. And thats after they have been checked on the computer via their drivers licence or any proof of identaty. If no insurance you get basic treatment and the shipped to the comunity hospital that is funded by the state or very under funded and volenteer doctors that have not finished med school.

Thankfully, you don't have to take their word. You sign a contract - that protects both you and the insurance company.

Nice to know that health care in every country except for the US can keep you from dying.

The ER will always treat you, insurance or not. Of course after that they will send you to a hopsital that treats patients without insurance. Once there you will be treated by fully trained and licenses professionals. Will the facilities or personnel be the best money can buy? No - but that is the price you pay by not purchasing insurance.

Why should someone that is able to buy beer and smokes, but is unwilling to take control of their own health have access to the same level of care as a person who does plan for the future?

So, what your saying is that the people in the USA that don't have health insurance are people who don't plan for the future? They all smoke and drink and therefor don't deserve a free health plan? It's their fault because they're lazy and they should suffer if anything happens to them? Hmmm, nice place :thumbdown:
What happened if you had a pre-existing condition? Greater risk for the insurance company, and therefor higher premiums, but if only this person had planned ahead and not gotten this condition in the first place :helpsmilie:
Okay, lets say you work for a company and make an okay living, allowing you to buy a house and raise a family. The company provides its employees with a great health plan, but something BIG happens, like a global financial crisis and the company goes under and the family looses not only it's health insurance, but its source of income. Does this family deserve it because it didn't plan ahead? Little Billy gets sick and needs an operation, what will happen then? Loose their house? This is the problem with your system, its all good if you can afford it. But what about the people, good honest hard working people that can't? What about the people who are refused insurance? What about part time workers? I have met so many people while traveling in the US who can't afford health insurance, and live scared because if it. I can't fathom the idea that if i get sick, i can't go see the doctor because i can't afford it. Or if i have an accident and an extended hospital stay, that i will spend the rest of my life worrying about how i'm going to pay for it. :confused1: It's shameful, IMHO and im glad that you have a President that has the balls to do what needed to be done to drive this through. You can see where Obama learned his tactics from :smartass:
The Republicans are still applying their spin, but hopefully there are enough intelligent people out there who can see through it and allow this program to develop. Welcome to the First World America! :clap:

Once again you are just taking a few hot topics that the progressives like to tell to 'prove' their point and running with it. No thought to actually doing any research or reading on your own, and obviously no understanding that the real state of healthcare in the US.

There are safety nets already in place for all the scenarios you brought up.

How can healthcare be a right, when the only way to give that right to everyone is to steal from one group of people in order to freely give it away to another group? That is evil and wrong.

???... Actually, i have been researching this topic more than you think. This is a quote taken from here: Health Care Statistics in the United States
Health Insurance
The United States is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that does not have a universal health care system. Source: Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences
In 2006, the percentage of Americans without health insurance was 15.8%, or approximately 47 million uninsured people. Source: US Census Bureau
Among the 84.2% with health insurance in 2006, coverage was provided through an employer 59.7%, purchased individually 9.1%, and 27.0% was government funded (Medicare, Medicaid, Military). (There is some overlap in coverage figures.) Source: US Census Bureau
The primary reason given for lack of health insurance coverage in 2005 was cost (more than 50%), lost job or a change in employment (24%), Medicaid benefits stopped (10%), ineligibility for family insurance coverage due to age or leaving school (8%). Source: National Center for Health Statistics

More than 40 million adults stated that they needed but did not receive one or more of these health services (medical care, prescription medicines, mental health care, dental care, or eyeglasses) in 2005 because they could not afford it. Source: National Center for Health Statistics
Medicaid, which accounted for 12.9% of health care coverage in 2006, is a health insurance program jointly funded by the federal and state governments to provide health care for qualifying low-income individuals. Source: US Census Bureau
Medicare, a federally funded health insurance program that covers the health care of most individuals 65 years of age and over and disabled persons, accounted for 13.6% of health care coverage in 2006. Source: US Census Bureau
Medicare operates with 3% overhead, non-profit insurance 16% overhead, and private (for-profit) insurance 26% overhead. Source: Journal of American Medicine 2007
As far as the "Safety Net" you describe, it doesn't seem to be working very well. This quote comes from here: SSRN-Get Sick, Get Out: The Medical Causes of Home Mortgage Foreclosures by Christopher Robertson, Richard Egelhof, Michael Hoke
In recent years, there has been national alarm about the rising rate of home foreclosures, which now strike one in every 92 households in America and which contribute to even broader macroeconomic effects. The "standard account" of home foreclosure attributes this spike to loose lending practices, irresponsible borrowers, a flat real estate market, and rising interest rates. Based on our study of homeowners going through foreclosures in four states, we find that the standard account fails to represent the facts and thus makes a poor guide for policy. In contrast, we find that half of all foreclosures have medical causes, and we estimate that medical crises put 1.5 million Americans in jeopardy of losing their homes last year.

Half of all respondents (49%) indicated that their foreclosure was caused in part by a medical problem, including illness or injuries (32%), unmanageable medical bills (23%), lost work due to a medical problem (27%), or caring for sick family members (14%). We also examined objective indicia of medical disruptions in the previous two years, including those respondents paying more than $2,000 of medical bills out of pocket (37%), those losing two or more weeks of work because of injury or illness (30%), those currently disabled and unable to work (8%), and those who used their home equity to pay medical bills (13%). Altogether, seven in ten respondents (69%) reported at least one of these factors.

If these findings can be replicated in more comprehensive studies, they will suggest critical policy reforms. We lay out one approach, focusing on an insurance-model, which would help homeowners bridge temporary gaps caused by medical crises. We also present a legal proposal for staying foreclosure proceedings during verifiable medical crises, as a way to protect homeowners and to minimize the negative externalities of foreclosure.

Keywords: home foreclosures, medical events, medicine, mortgages, bankruptcy, insurance, homeownership

Yup, your system seems to be working just fine :innocent: So obviously your not one of the 30,000,000 to 47,000,000 people in the USA who doesn't have health insurance, so i can see how you might feel that there isn't a problem. Have you ever had to rely on one of those "safety nets" after a medical crisis? Seriously, not picking a fight here, i just want to know. You see, i work with a lot of Americans, all of which have good, expensive health insurance plans. The vast majority i talk to have looked upon our Canadian system with envy and find it remarkable that it doesn't matter who you are, what you do or where ever your from, rich or poor, healthy or with a pre-existing condition, we are all covered and treated equally through our universal healthcare system. Anybody at any time can walk into a hospital without fear of loosing their house because they need medical help.This indeed is a right for any tax-paying citizen, you work all your life to contribute your share to the system, the least the system can do for you is provide you with basic health care.
The Canadian system certainly isn't without it's flaws, and i supose the same as well for all the other developed countries in the world, and i'm actually astonished that not once durring the debates that i heard or read was another countries Universal Health Care system praised or scrutinised. Like usual though, there's not much of interest outside of America's borders, is there :rofl:
Your last comment:
How can healthcare be a right, when the only way to give that right to everyone is to steal from one group of people in order to freely give it away to another group? That is evil and wrong.
This is a rediculous statement! Seriously, what do you know about implementing Universal Health Care in the USA? It's never been done. What is being stolen? From whom? What part of Universal don't you understand? Am i missing something? You have to explain, i can't read between the lines here?

US healthcare reform
 

As an American living in Canada, allow me to leap into the fray. May I be so bold as to make a few points. I grew up, by the way, in a hardcore Republican household.

Fair, equal and affordable access to healthcare should be a right. Fair, equal and affordable is what is missing in the present system. If the present system worked, we would not be having to have this debate.

It amuses me when the conservative types play the "Socialist" card, when they cannot even define it. It also amuses me when the conservative types conveniently ignore the obvious "socialist" aspects of US society that we already enjoy. Examples--

*Public education to the age of 18, paid for by all of us, to the obvious benefit of society. Seems to me a true conservative should work to change this system, pay for the education of their own progeny out of their pocket, thereby relieving me of helping to educate their kids. I have no children, but have had to help pay for the education of everyone else.

*Publicly funded fire departments and police, to the obvious benefit of all. A true conservative would work to change this. Privatize fire and police and pay for the service out of their own pocket. Those who choose not to pay for fire or police will have to let their house burn and deal with criminals themselves.

*Public libraries, funded by tax dollars, to the obvious benefit of all. Conservatives should change this as well. If you want a book, go buy it.

*Publicly funded highways, bridges, etc. A conservative would privatize all this. If you want to drive somewhere, pay a toll to whoever built the highway.

*Public defenders office. What is all this about appointing a public defender at the taxpayers dollar if you get arrested. A conservative would say that it is your problem if you get busted. Oh, and once sent to prison, a criminal should have to pay for their own prison stay.

*Medicare and Medicaid. Certainly not perfect systems, but have unquestionably helped a lot of people, including, by the way, most of the conservatives' grandparents. A true conservative would be beating the drum to eliminate these programs. Look at the money we would save as the elderly die in the streets.

*Welfare. Eliminate it. Why should we care about people who cannot care for themselves. Let them eat cake.

*Why should the military recieve lifetime healthcare at taxpayers expense. it is a job like any other, let them pay for it themselves.

*Why should Congress recieve lifetime "socialized" healthcare at the taxpayers expense. They certainly do a bangup job to deserve this benefit. To paraphrase our man "W"--heckofajob, Congress.

In reality, the list can go on and on. Think about it, so much of our so-called capitalist society is "socialized". We have grown up with the way it is, and consider it normal. Why then do we draw this distinct line at providing fair access to health care? Is not healthcare as important to the good of our "capitalist" system as is education, for instance?

Hillbilly WV, you, as well as the rest of the "conservatives" need to get a broader perspective on life and what works, because what we now have clearly does not work.

It also amuses me when conservatives decry the "government" holding us hostage to doling out healthcare. As it is, we are held hostage by the present system. Our healthcare decisions are being made by overpaid drones in the insurance industry, whose only motivation is to make the maximum profit for the insurance companies while ensuring their own bloated salaries. If you are comfortable with the CEOs of these insurance companies making millions denying needed healthcare (while you are pulling down all of $10 or $20 per hour doing whatever it is you do), well then you deserve the present system

It needs to be repeated---we would not be having this debate if the current system worked.

End of rant; I need a beer.

I think a round of applause is in order!
:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Wow Fredsuleman, that pretty much sums it up. Couldn't have said it better myself!
:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Well as a USA citizen living in the US I can see both sides. I have a healthcare plan so it will do little for me.
But none of this has anything to do with can the tax base pay for it. We can but something will have to give. Maybe the top .01% can kick in there taxes insted of forming a tax free company out side of the US. If not gust sizes their assets try them for treason, hang them out side congress and the white house it will help idea across I think. (Halliburton and others)

The USA people have been handed a 2$ trillion IOU but you pay it slap in the face by both ruling parties. I think a NHS run a bit less than that and I know be far more usefull to all the people than some useless war. 2 trillion and all I get out of it is more taxes. Stuff that! Tell you what you like that plan you pay it the IRS will love you long time.

Yes I know that the people that do not plan and do nothing are a drain on the hard working and people that plan of the USA but there nothing when you look at the people at the top. A Fing war gust to bump up the price of gas when you got one going that will do the same for less? Billions in some potsy scheme? Shut down refineries gust to bost the price of gas? shut down power lines gust to raise the demand for power and the price? Lie raise fears and price fix gust to make even more money? All this and more.

The insurance company dose not use a contract to protect itself. It has lawyers, bribes politicians and Judges and time. If it holds out long enof they hope you die and can not collect.

Still with all this my taxes will go up to pay for it some how some rich wanker will get even more money and poor will get little help. Think the states will have to come up with the cash to fund it so it will not happen for years and years. Some states have said they will not go for the plan and said no there will be no NHP.

What interests me....
 

I know not a single soul in the UK or other countries with a similar healthcare system that would ever say 'Lets get rid of our free health care and replace it with an insurance based system'. Improved maybe, but not removed.

Surely this debate is about personal greed and nothing else?

Does the US need heathcare reform - yep But this isnt the plan we need. Obama is pushing the US toward a Socialist Gov in a hurry!!

Everyday I see my neighbors sit on their porch while I go to work in my shop. They receive HUD money for Housing, Medicade for medical and Food Stamps to eat and dont do a damn thing but make more babies and lots of noise. Yet I go to work and do my best to make a living - pay my insurance (health/property and toys) make the payments on all the things I want and then on April 15th I get to Give the Government 28% of all I make, so that my neighbors can sit on their collective butts and do nothing.

The people that do work in this country could afford health care, if the Gov would quit giving money to every freakin illegal that runs across the border to have a baby. Babies that the tax payers support for 18years or longer .................................................. .................................................. ...............................



Geeze I came to this site to talk about motorcycles and going places not the Crap going on in Gov. In November we will have a chance to vote out most of the incumbents and start with a new batch of elected idiots

3 or more groups Not two
 

It would seem that the people anti the legislation see two groups of people:

1. Those who work hard and can afford healthcare
2. Spongers who deliberately breed large broods, don't work and are rubbing their hands at getting free healthcare.

Surely there is a 3rd group that they are ignoring, the people who are going to be helped by this, people who would work, but cannot afford healthcare for one reason or another, and will now be genuinely helped.

It would be interesting to know how many people were in each of these groups. There are probably other groups too ..........

I can t improve on the replies by Fred and Ron , so I will just offer another observation.

I find it very odd and puzzling that in a country supposedly built on the notion of LIBERTY it is considered by many to be the most exquisite and extreme curse to describe sombody as a LIBERAL , and that these so called conservative folk making such disparaging remarks are in effect proposing a regression of society to a level of barbarity which would put the taliban to shame.
Any form of social organisation or government whether it is run by politicians and rational thinkers or by bearded and robed egomaniacs claiming devine guidance is in essence a version of ´´ socialism¨ . Get over it.

All that you said is true CaptTeach but you give more that 28% to the government with all the tax they dream up for the tax payer to pay. It is how they get there $ or so they tell us.

I to hate the illegals that runs across the border to! There illegal because they do not have the legal paper work. So the US government lose a bit of tax $ at there pay rate it will not amount to much. But the government gains a cheap labor market that the people in the government use even when it there laws that make them illegal. It helps big and little business and gives them an escape goat any time they need one. All this and all they need to do is not hand out a paper card and punch in a few numbers in a computer at the border. We did this before computers and had no problem the hell is problem now? Want a real kick go ask a Native American, first nation or what ever the white man came up with to easy his conscience about people coming to the USA and you not liking it.

I hate your neighbors as well no this time I realy do hate them. Hate food stamps now look like credit card need to get people like to Mexico let them live in a real poor slum. People that can work and gust can not bring them self to go do it. They need help only a grate big boot in the back side will fix. I have seen to many poor workers all over to care about waste of skin. They like kids grate here is a job for them look after other people kids and live off that not over taxed workers. Here is why. Do not if it is still so but at one time you can get T bones and caviar with food stamps. I worked at grocery store and this set of people cam in once a week and got that with there stamps I had to bag it. They wanted "help out", wanted me to pack there car with the bags as there to dam useless to do it them self. I told them no and got sent back to the store manager told him why he gust told me it was ok, he liked the idea that if you do not work you do not eat. Better to get some illegals to move in, they work, the kids will do your yard and there food is grate.

As far as a Socialist Gov well ahh hate to tell you we got one, have for years. The US government has bailed out huge companies time and again for seeming no reason. Capitalist say companies that fail are week and need to fail, socialist say we need them for job growth, national defence and any other hot button. This bank thing is gust the last. Look at it this way if you kill your business do you think you will get millions in a bonus? Is your boss going pat you on the back and say good job killing off the company here is 30 million hate to lose you! Hell no. You will be lucky to ever find work agen. Capitalist will not give a dam if they loss you the cut there loss long before it comes to that, they cut you once your output is in just not as black as it can be let alone in the red. Just ask all the people out of work that want it all that lost there jobs do to the plant moving some place the labor is cheap. There capitalist when it helps the bottom line (there bottom line) socialist when it helps them hate people like that. Government workers get socialist perks for doing there job and you and I pay for them till they die. They gust do not want you to have some thing even a little close to them.

As far as liberal vs conservative (D vs. R) most of that is the press branding someone one way or the the other helps them to control your thinking. The truth is there not to far off from one another, there kids play together in the same schools they go do the same things at the same place at the same time. Once out side of camera range both are as pig head as the other. None give an inch and none will get the job done. There job as they see it is to get reelected not get laws passed.
LIBERTY has nothing to do with LIBERAL.
It is only a extreme curse to describe somebody as a liberal if there a conservative. Works the other way around to.
Socialism as he put it is being used to define a government theory not the literal definition of the word.

I've been way too busy at work to spend time to write a reply.

The reasons I do not want such a system is two fold.

1. Nothing is free. This free healthcare is not going to be free. The money has to come from somewhere. Probably by taxing me. Raising my income tax, imposing a vat tax, or taxing me in some hidden fashion (if you tax a business they will pass that cost right back on to the consumer). I am happy paying for my healthcare - the level of care, the type of care, the monetary limits, deductibles, etc - out of my own pocket. Under a gov't system I will be paying for other peoples care and pay for procedures that I find reprehensible.

2. Healthcare is not an unlimited resource. There are only so many doctors, nurses, hospitals, clinics, and pharmaceuticals available. There WILL be rationing. Who will dictate rationing? Some bonehead some federal monstrosity of a building.

Why should that person have any say over my healthcare? I am willing to pay for what I receive, and I'll be damned if I let someone else dictate what healthcare is available to me.

Also note, that I am not a conservative. The definitions are not accurate...

Those that are referred to as 'liberals' are not liberal. They are the opposite of liberal. They are progressives - they favor inequitable rules and taxation based upon gender, race, and income.

I am a liberal...or I should say libertarian in that I espouse individual freedom. Of course that scares people in the collective...

No bailouts, No healthcare, No VAT Tax

If you are happy with your nationalized healthcare, by all means be happy. Use it, love it, whatever. Why must you push your ideas on me?

The current system sucks and the detractors brought nothing to the table BUT criticism...and at the end of the day, noise needs to get filtered and things need to get done.
A better system doesn't happen as a revolution but an evolution-nature has laid that out as the natural process that works. What legislation was passed...is a way forward, but shouldn't be construed as the Shangri-la of health-care solutions.

So lets get back to arguing about the best enduro bike for a newbie to RTW...

I believe the IRS will now be acting as a tax collector for Private Insurance Companies.

However, there is no legal requirement the new taxes be used for Health Care.

You may recall Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. were paid for by raiding Medicare and Social Security taxes which are not required to be spent on the welfare of the people.

So this "Health Care" tax might end up funding an invasion of Iran or Pakistan one day.

People seem to forget why Otto Von Bismarck fathered the Modern Welfare State. Certainly not for the good of the people but rather as an instrument of warfare.

A more centralized and powerful US Federal Government with even more funding to use as it pleases to control and dominate other people is not an improvement.

The difference between a tax and a fee is that a tax is never earmarked whereas a fee is. I'm not sure how the American system is going to work but we pay health insurance fees over here - 14.9% of your taxable income, half of which is deducted from your paycheck the other half is paid for by your employer. This money is completely and 100% used for health care and nothing else. It's quite possible that the system was different under Bismarck and that the second Reich still funded health care through taxes.

And please do not get welfare mixed up with health care. A modern welfare state does much more for its citizens then provide them with health care that everybody can afford ;)

There is no requirement Medicare/Social Security and now Obamacare be spent on the public welfare. It is just more General Fund money for the Federal Government to be used as they please. If history is any guide, it will likely be used for war at the worst and/or corporate giveaways at the best.

I mention Bismarck, the father of the modern welfare state, because this was precisely his purpose. He was jealous of the loyalty shown between family members and wanted that loyalty transferred to to the State for the purposes of the State. The same is true of the US Welfare/Warfare State.

Obviously health care is becoming less affordable in the US. The bill was written by the Insurance Companies. Personal income is falling, unemployment is rising and health care costs are still increasing at double digit rates.

The bill has done nothing to increase access to healthcare. All it has done is increase economic uncertainty and prevent economic recovery. Access to healthcare will be decreasing in the US for decades to come:

Two University Hospital clinics balk at government insurance - The Denver Post