Health Insurance: Can We Still Avoid A Single Payer Plan?

Washington is a busy place these days. With a Supreme Court nominee prepping to be grilled, two very ill stalwart Democratic senators (Byrd and Kennedy), the federal government taking over private industry at an alarming rate, and the focus on health care, it's as fast paced as I can remember in my lifetime. These folks have a lot going on.

With the debate on health care and the governments obsession with making sure everyone is insured, I was trying to remember what Medicaid is for. My understanding is that it was to cover the poor who otherwise would have no access to healthcare. Why isn't that program being used to take care of those Americans who aren't covered at work or due to unemployment? I realize that it has been expanded oer the years to include larger and larger groups of poor and disabled citizens, which may be why it's broke today.

Currently, we are spending about $43 billion yearly on uninsured people who go to emergency rooms for colds, flu, and other non-life-threatening illnesses and injuries. That money, added to what we currently spend on Medicaid, could help put these people into a basic health insurance policy paid by Medicaid, but purchased through a private insuror. This keeps the private sector active in coverage and makes sure that the government doesn't get involved in the insurance business. I don't want to see a single payer system in our country, with the federal government making decisions on my healthcare. Medicaid would have to undergo a major transformation, but we've been hearing that it was coming for the last 30 years. It would re-enforce what the program was supposed to do in the first place. Could something like this end up a win-win situation?