Home | About | Donate

Single Payer Healthcare, It's Not Pie-in-the-Sky, It's About Stopping the Pie Shop Piracy!


Single Payer Healthcare, It's Not Pie-in-the-Sky, It's About Stopping the Pie Shop Piracy!

Bill Honigman

The movement for Healthcare Justice is currently coming to a peak in California with the recent introduction and now advancement to the State Senate floor for a vote due next week on SB 562 The Healthy California Act. The principle authors and citizen sponsors are being asked to provide updated proof of what those of us fighting for a Single Payer system of financing Healthcare have known for a very long time, that Single Payer based on progressive taxation to replace private health insurance premiums saves money and saves lives.


I have R-Party friends who view their shares in pharma and insurance stocks as more important than the the health and financial security of some middle class worker. They aren't apologetic about it: their revenue stream is all that matters.

Bernie Sanders, supported by the Nurses Union, on Single Payer: "That's what our campaign is about, it is thinking big...Nothing real will get [done] unless we have a political revolution where millions of people finally stand up."

Dianne Feinstein, supported by Big Pharma and Big Insurance, on Single Payer: "...a takeover of all medicine in the United States....I'm not there."


Feinstein is, however, all in with the AMA, pharma and insurance's "takeover of all medicine in the US" since WWII.


To be fair, she does support Medicare, Medicaid, and the VA, although these government administered entities have plenty to do with the AMA, Big Pharma, and Big Insurance. The three government units I mention currently provide over half the insurance to those who are insured.

So I'll be kind and say she supports government-run health care to a significant extent. But not if it impinges upon the preferences of her puppet masters.


More and more proud to be living in CA for the last 40 years. Kudos to Dr. Honigman for working in OC CA, an area I consider to be enemy territory.


Solidarity, Dr. Bill! Expanded and improved Medicare For All/state version thereof. Everybody in. Nobody out! Less expensive in the long run and better outcomes for patients.


Thanks so much T. OC is getting bluer all the time. We had two YUUUGE rallies for Bernie last year, and a thriving bunch of progressive activist organizations including Progressive Democrats of America PDA Orange Co CA Chapter with over 1,000 members. Onward! :smiley::fist::fire::statue_of_liberty:


YUUGE thanks M. Right there with you brother!


Synopsis of Letter-in-Progress to Single Payer Advocates:
Want Single Payer? Provide Free Healthcare Events, like Remote Area Medical Did in California in 2009 - but Politicize it

Here's an idea for how to make single payer happen: Hold free events that a) provide basic health care, b) explain single payer, and c) register voters.

Sounds complicated? No need to reinvent the wheel - the free healthcare delivery part has been done.

Eight years ago, the nonpolitical doctor organization Remote Area Medical (RAM) held an open air event in a coliseum near L.A., CA. Doctors provided free dental and other basic health care (mammograms, pap smears, e.g.).

Thousands lined up - thousands without medical insurance, with inadequate medical insurance, or with medical insurance whose cost made it impossible to use, except for emergencies (i.e., like Obamacare).

What to do: Combine health care provision with health care advocacy. Tap RAM for logistics - but provide not only health care, but education and voter registration.

Here's why it can work:

1a) U.S. health care is bad, so 'colliseum-type' or mobile health care van events will always be mobbed - medical activists won't reach out to people; rather, people difficult to reach will come to them (and note - these will be right liberals and Republicans too). Thus, person-to-person contact and education can both persuade and enfranchise both liberals and the mis-educated mass base of the U.S. right.

1b) Oh - and in connection with the 'education part' - Sanders himself can draw crowds and persuade by speaking at the mass, colliseum-type events.

2) But - as right wing critics of health often say, 'that would cost money.' Yes, it would cost money. And the large left liberal base that poured its hearts and wallets out for Sanders, would surely do the same for this initiative - including the 'education' part that calls for massive tax increases on the rich.

Well wouldn't you?

Especially at a moment that single payer is not only needed, but is becoming the defining issue separating right liberal Democrats from the large number of progressive, 'lesser of two evil' Sanders voters that ended up voting Democrat?

3) But won't the right with its vast media power and 'closed-circuit-tuned-into-right-wing-media' viewers ridicule such a movement to death? Well...they will try - as will right liberal Democrats. Good luck to them. Health care receivers will be getting help they need and talking one-on-one with decent people. We'll see where the cards fall. And violent right wing disruption? As Maxine Waters once noted, that only works when you can outnumber and intimidate victims and progressives - but with large numbers of health-care-less people getting support they need? Don't think so...

This initiative could deliver a shock to the system to both the right and right liberals.


Like this idea, progressives? Act:

Forward this with your own note to Our Revolution at:

National Nurse United - the organization at the forefront of calls for single payer in CA - at:


I posted this in another thread, but it's several of the tangles the legisture is trying to wade through at the moment with our single payer bill in California:


This is a perfect time to compare and contrast the medical care the members receive while active and retired...to the common folk.


Good news. Sanders is such a populist that I'm convinced he could have beaten Trump. I attended his rally in Vista last year and was so amazed at the support he garnered. Hopefully Issa will be defeated next time around but I feel that it was OC that allowed his victory in '16. I'm PA working occaisionally at Mission and St. Joseph's and have to constantly bite my lip. Thanks for your efforts.

Tom Kolt


Thnx T. By members, I presume you mean every resident of Calif. Under CA SB562 all residents will receive comprehensive care much more extensive than now exists under even the best so-call Cadillac plans, or as you might say Expanded and Improved Medicare for All. There will be no distinction between retirees and non-retirees. Seniors presently have Medicare with supplemental Parts A through D dictating how much they will personally need to fund. Under the new California system, all supplementals will be covered. All this because of the phenomenal savings achieved by eliminating private insurance and negotiating down drug prices. Finally there will be no tiered care, with no copays, deductibles, or other hidden expenses all residents will be given all the care decided legitimate by a governing board comprised of professionals and laypersons, much as is already done by the federal agency Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services CMS. Interdisciplinary evidence based best practices are used in the medical decision making, not a private corporate boardroom or CEO's ultimately interested in their own bottom line.


Dr. Bill, thanks for mentioning so many good reasons that single-payer would save people money. There are lots of good talking points in this article. I especially like the point about other redundant insurance being unnecessary if we have single-payer. I think people can readily see the value in that.

What's missing, though, is specific information about how, exactly, this all will be funded, and that is what a lot of people are concerned about. Just saying it relies on progressive taxation to replace private health insurance premiums doesn't give people (especially upper middle class and wealthier) any idea of how much their taxes will go up if the plan is implemented. If we can't be more specific about how it will be paid for, people won't support it. Also, in past California state single-payer proposals, businesses or employers were mandated to pay part of the cost. If that is the case with SB 562, most business owners won't support it, whereas, if they did not have to finance the plan, I think it would probably get broader support from the business community.


Thanks P. Formulas for exact funding mechanism come from fiscal analysis the most current of which still has not been released. This is why #SB562 is still only a policy bill and should be easier for fiscal skeptics to support rather than later after fiscal details are added in and opportunity to oppose will be in reconciliation. Of course models using these formulas exist throughout the civilized world like in Canada and Taiwan, and all demonstrate substantial savings to businesses as well as to individuals. Nicely discussed in movie FixItHealthcare.com. :blush::+1::fire::hospital::statue_of_liberty:


I was just contemplating what you wrote about not needing duplicate insurance, "These additional savings would include eliminating redundant insurances such as Workers Compensation, and medical liability for personal and commercial properties such as auto insurance," when it occurred to me that you would still probably have to keep medical liability insurance for your home, business and/or vehicle, because SB 562 is just for California, and I assume only California citizens would be covered. So in case somone was injured on your property or by your vehicle, and he or she was not an official California resident (and I guess that doesn't include undocumented residents), that person still would not be covered and you would be liable for their medical bills. Am I right about this, or am I missing something?


Actually, I meant the members of government. But thank you for the info.