Comparing Health Security America with HR 676, the Dems' single payer plan

The plans are Health Security America (HSA), and HR 676, cited as the United States National Health Insurance Act (or the Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act). Health Security America health plan was designed primarily by Dr. Fred Bannister and very specifically described in his book Health Security America: Fixing the health care crisis. The United States National Health Insurance Act was led by Rep. John Conyers, D-MI. Both plans fall under the umbrella of “Medicare for All.”

Both of the “Medicare for All” plans are revolutionary and merit examination. The list below has some of the main points that need to be compared and contrasted, with the aim of ensuring that every American finally gets a fair health plan, unadulterated by the concerns of special interests such as drugs and device manufacturers, hospital and professional associations.

Issues:

(1) Which health plan gives the individual citizen a voice in a decision making process as free of unseen lobbyist influence as possible? Will information on major issues be as available to the individual citizen as it is to the special interests?

(2) Which health plan offers the more accessible, transparent, and above all simple administration?

(3) Which health plan will allow the citizen to make the final decisions on the cost (premiums) and coverage since he or she will pay this bill every month for HSA or yearly in taxes for HR 676?

(4) Which health plan will permit clear accountability (as opposed to vague, resistant bureaucracy)?

(5) Which health plan makes the citizen more cognizant of his or her personal and family health responsibility?

Please read on for a point-by-point comparison of the two plans.