Any step toward returning to a federalist philosophy is probably a good idea, although it flies in the face of "conventional thinking".

The tenth amendment states:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people".

Since I find no mention of health care in the Constitution, I would say that it should fall to the States, or to the people. But we don't put much stock in that old document anymore.

The only debate we're allowed to engage in centers around which federal plan to adopt as opposed to whether the federal government should even be involved, serving as another reminder of the advance toward a totalitarian federal government and the abolishment of the States as sovereign entities.

The health care problem today, like most others, is a product of many forces at play. Economics plays a role, as in currency devauation and inflation leading to higher costs. Lack of competition and consumer choice through excessive regulation and lobbying drives the costs higher as well. I won't get into the toxic food and water supply that the advances in chemistry has allowed us to "enjoy".

Health care is practically the only commodity in which the costs rise with the advancement of technology and an increase in demand, no doubt thanks to our "free market" and relentless government intervention at the behest of the industry.

In my opinion, health care is one example out of many that demand an overall rethinking about the role of the federal government as defined by the Constitution, i.e. focused solely on national defense and foreign policy. Internal affairs should be handled by the States or local governments, where individual participation in self-government leads to a sense of community and brotherhood with your neighbors, and where many more problems are likely to be solved in a greatly accelerated time frame.

McCain’s Health Insurance Plan Would Not Cover Child Featured At Campaign Event»

Since you are talking about health care and children, I thought this was appropriate to the conversation.

Thank you pollchecker, you are absolutely correct and the Republicans will refuse to compromise on even covering the children. I took my thoughts out to a couple of other "conservative" sites and they refuse to even discuss a compromise. They are shocked that an old republican would even suggest it.

I can see the cost right here in Arizona of the illegals breaking our state budget and they are still piling in bringing all their sick friends and family members. $38 million was the cost just in 2004. We have had several hospitals closed when their money ran out. Emergency care is far too expensive for any state to handls.

I explained to several old friends that McCain has zero chance at winning and we would be thrown into full coverage for all residents. The GOP is showing another split with Alan Keyes running as a Constitution Party returning to split the GOP even more. They want those prohibitions in Amendments to the Constitution to stop any more talk about keeping abortions out of the government and banning gay marriages and death with dignity. This is the religious right popping up again.

They have no ability to see in the future of American Values. They are stuck on their bibles and like Huckabee want the Constitution rewritten to reflect Jesus Christ. All I can say is that I had the best of America when our Separation of Church and State was respected. No one will ever legislate any God into my life.

Unless we can get universal health care coverage and/or single payor like Medicare and Tricare, the lower and middle class are simply screwed on healthcare, as it will only be available to those who can afford to pay the exhorbitant and escalating costs to stay alive and healthy.

But how is it that we have "accepted" the notion that health care should only be attainable by those who can afford it? Does that mean it's OK for not-wealthy people to simply die because they can't afford an appropriate treatment? Does that mean people with pre-existing conditions, like skin cancer and heart disease, should accept that it's only a matter of time before they can expect to die early because they can't get insurance or afford to buy the magic curing potion advertised on TV? Is it OK for a family to have to decide whether to treat little Johnny for cancer or keep their job and home? How civilized is that?

Might as well sign up for the Soylent Green program now.

What if the federal government foots the bill and the state regulates it. Eliminate any and all greedy corporate insurance or drug company involvement. Just good doctors, nurses and state of the art equipment and an atmosphere where prevention is the rule. State level management would keep it local so we control our own management personal and everybody gets the same treatment no matter who you are or what economic level you find yourself. I am a veteran, I just turned 64 and I take no drugs on a daily basis, Now that I am getting older I go to the doctor once a year for a checkup or when ever I have a problem. I have had three hernia surgeries and various skin cancers removed. Overall, I am satisfied with the treatment I have received but there are always improvements that can be made, thats why it must be kept local. Federal government doles out the bucks, that's it. All decisions about care treatment and procedures are made locally by the patient and their doctor, not in Washington.
Have I left anything out?

My husband served in the Navy for 30 years, so he and I are blessed with TriCare, which has some faults like any system, but we have been extremely satisfied with the benefits provided. And my mother has been extremely satisfied with the services that Medicare provides.

In our cases, the patient and doctor make decisions, not the government, but the government pays the bills according to negotiated rates which every health care provider knows well. How many millions of active duty military and their families, retired military and their families, and over-65 or disabled are already being served by these single payor systems?

Universal health care for all Americans would cost more than anything already in the budget. Yes, we could do it but only if we scaled down all other expenses. This would put all medical procedures in the hands of the politicians and my friends, the doctors would walk out.

Our emergency rooms are free along with the medical clinics set up for people unable to pay.

Lynda, Medicare is broke and cannot last another 10 years. Medicare covers less than anyone might suppose and we are forced into supplemental policies to keep from losing our incomes.

It is easy and successful for candidates to promise all this stuff but they offer no solution of how to pay for it without losing our choices of doctors, if any are left.

This will put our government into bankruptcy unless we all take full control over our lifestyles, diets, exercises and stop drinking, smoking, and illegal drugs. Americans have lost their desire to do anything without Big Daddy; even down to handing the government our medical choices. My idea was to start with the children and let the States handle the coverage payable.

I'm being told that Americans will not compromise and want the federal government to handle the whole thing so the Americans don't have to bother with it. I will never agree to this kind of government control over me. I will fight to the death to keep Clinton from any mandate over any decision I make. She knows how weak and ill-informed the voters are and just like Orwell wrote, we are all sheep waiting in line for our orders.

This whole program is simply full-out welfare for people too damn lazy to take control of their lives.

The reason health care is broken is because the health care industry (i.e., private profit-making corporations) is controlling our benefits to preserve their obscene profits. They are the reason health care costs so much in our country. I understand more and more doctors support some sort of universal healthcare/single payor systems because they are sick and tired of the health insurance and pharma games.

Here's an example, my husband worked for a health care logistics company for a (short) while. Insurance companies contracted with the logistics company, so then the logistics company contracted with local service agencies for health care services, who then found workers to actually do the work. So the insurance company pays the logistics agency $250-450 per unit and the actual workers get around $15-50 per unit for doing the actual work. So where did the rest of the money ($235-400) go and how did that actually benefit the patient?

As recipients of Medicare and Tricare, there is NO ONE from the government telling our family how to live our lives other than our doctor's advisories, NO ONE is telling the doctors what they are allowed to say or do for us, and NO ONE is telling us we can't drink or smoke or play parchesi. And none of us has had any delays in getting the care we need, either.

People (old and young) are dying because they lack the funds to access health care in our pay-to-get-care system. A local preteen died when a tooth abcess spread into his brain because his family couldn't afford to take him to the dentist, and they couldn't get any financial help from our cash-starved SCHIPS program. And how about the health insurance companies who have been caught dumping beneficiaries whose medical problems are too expensive for the insurance companies' bottom line?

Does a child choose to be born poor and therefore deserve to be treated as "too damn lazy to take control" of it's life? Some may say it's the parents' fault for having a child they can't afford, which may be true, but it isn't the child's fault, is it? Can you see a 3 year old denouncing his/her financially-strapped mother because she can't buy health insurance for him? Or dental care? Or should the government just take away children that the parents can't afford to buy insurance for? I'm afraid that my mother would have been in that category except for the fact I was lucky enough to be fathered by a Navy man before he decided he didn't want children, but the Navy provided health care for me until I was out of school. What if my father had been a hardworking brick-layer or barber instead? It would have been "tough luck, magee!"

And is my 80 year old mother "too damn lazy to take control" of her life, so sucks on the teat of government-funded Medicare for the rest of her life? I think my mother's 45+ years of work and raising her children all by herself earned her something including respect.

When I turn 65 (too soon), I will be moved off TriCare into Medicare, like every other TriCare benefit recipient. Does that mean I'm "too damn lazy to take control" of my life, too?

I, too, think voters are doled out misinformation about healthcare, most especially by our government. They've been paying media hacks to deliver all kinds of false news, from education to military matters to who knows what else?

I understand your concern about government interference in our lives, and I agree to some point on health care, but right now I'm much more concerned about this government's unchecked violation of our 4th Amendment rights, including government collection and storage of our health care records, financial records, communications, etc., and I'm terribly concerned about the loosy-goosy state of security and control over electronic voting.

Medicare is going broke. We have known this for 17 years and yet nobody seems to care. When the system hits bottom and those monthly checks and their coverage stops then you will understand why the majority of the American people are too lazy to act on this.

In many areas in America the zoning controls are being extended for additional space to the home for their elderly parents. It is expensive to live in a senior development that I knew about in 1983. I bought another piece of property to use for sale when I hit 68. I wanted to live away from kids who I trained to be self-sufficient. I was self sufficient. Most of the homes in Phoenix offer small units for the grandparents. We did this in California and I thought everyone did it.

I feel insulted for asking the States to step in on this problem when it brought only heavy criticism here. I have learned that CHB is firm microcosm of political opinions but missing that old American quality of standing on your own feet. I realize the churches offer no help and after our orphanages were closed by Reagan, our homeless people has tripled. Churches quit!

Can you even imagine when the migrants first came to the new world that they expected government programs to save their asses? My own ancestors moved to the territory of Texas to show their skills at cattle raising. They nearly starved in the north east colonies.

In those days there were no schools and parents taught their kids the basics of academics and math. Today the American people are sheep searching to graze on someone else's pastures. I've lived too damn long and it saddens me to see what America has become. I woke up in 1964 and watched our free nation fall into government programs that were illegal and impossible to pay.

I know this universal health care will fail and for this reason I suggest it start in small pieces allowing the states to tackle it starting with young children only.