Title: National Health Insurance or Incremental Reform: Aim High, or at Our Feet?
Summary: In September of 2008 the American Journal of Public Health published a peer-reviewed article that takes a close look at the advantages of a single-payer health care system. Authors David Himmeistein and Steffie Woolhandler describe the numerous benefits of a single-payer system using a fiscal and political rationale.
Topic: Should the Obama administration attempt to convert the United States to a single-payer health care system?
Category: Academic Research
What is it? An article from the American Journal of Public Health
Publication Information: Sept. 2008
Author: David Himmeistein and Steffie Woolhandler
Location: American Journal of Public Health. http://0-web.ebscohost.com.janus.uoregon.edu/ehost/detail?vid=8&hid=115&sid=942f4331-4e7f-4bbb-b4ed-443e622f050f%40sessionmgr104&bdata=JmxvZ2lucGFnZT1sb2dpbi5hc3Amc2l0ZT1laG9zdC1saXZlJnNjb3BlPXNpdGU%3d#bib1
Accessed: Feb. 19, 2009
Support:
American Journal of Public Health
Ted Kennedy, Senator of Massachusetts
Nancy Landon Kassebaum, Former Senator of Kansas
The American Journal of Public Health is a peer-reviewed journal that is published once a month. The journal tries to publish the best scientific research in the field of public health. It was first published in 1911. The article references Senators Ted Kennedy (Massachusetts) and Nancy Landon Kassebaum (Kansas) because they worked with one another on health care reform during the 1990′s.
Audience and Agenda:
The American Journal of Public Health reaches an audience of 54,000 people through their website (ajph.org) and many more through its subscribers. Since this is a peer-reviewed journal, readership is mostly limited to those in the health care field or those with a special interest in the issues surrounding the U.S. health care system. Reading the AJPH educates its audience and provides information on the latest health-care technology.
Usefulness:
This article provides logical reasoning for the U.S. to switch to a single payer health care system, so it directly addresses my “should question.” Some of the most compelling arguments stem from the wasted money in the current system. For example, in the United States HMO‘s keep as much as 25% of the cost of premiums for their overhead and profit; whereas Canada’s system spends 1 % on overhead costs.
By reducing spending to Canadian levels, the U.S. would save at least 140 billion dollars a year, which is enough to fully cover the uninsured and upgrade coverage for those who are under-insured.
Works cited:
Academic Search Premier
ajph.org
About page – http://www.ajph.org/misc/about.shtml
quantcast.com
wikipedia.org
For other Academic Research posts, check out…
18) The Argument of Justice
22) Is Single-Payer not the Answer?
25) The Netherlands Could be a Model for the U.S.
30) Is Health Care Reform Just “Talk?”
[...] other Academic Research posts, check out… 16) National Health Insurance 18) The Argument of Justice 22) Is Single-Payer Not the Answer? 25) The Netherlands Could be a [...]
[...] other Academic Research posts, check out… 16) National Health Insurance 18) The Argument of Justice 22) Is Single-Payer Not the Answer? 30) Is Health Care Reform Just [...]
[...] other Academic Research posts, check out… 16) National Health Insurance 18) The Argument of Justice 25) The Netherlands Could be a Model for the U.S. 30) Is Health Care [...]
[...] other Academic Research posts, check out… 16) National Health Insurance 22) Is Single-Payer not the Answer? 25) The Netherlands Could be a Model for the U.S. 30) Is [...]
[...] second ideology for Universal Health Care in America is a Single-Payer system or a National Health Insurance. A single-payer health care system is where health care is paid for citizens from a single fund, [...]