Botox Nan did say she wanted single payer and compromised on Obamacare.

Via LVRJ

If you think Obamacare is a ruse to bring a single-payer system to America, a federal lawmaker has validated you.

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., has introduced the American Health Security Act, which would replace the Affordable Care Act with a requirement that each state set up a single-payer insurance system.

Nevada’s congressional delegation doesn’t seem enthusiastic about Sanders’ proposal. Half didn’t respond to a request for comment. Those who did were either unsupportive or noncommittal.

Chandler Smith, a spokesman for Sen. Dean Heller, said the Nevada Republican is against a single-payer system.

Greg Lemon, a spokesman for Rep. Joe Heck, R-Nev., said Heck is “opposed to a single-payer system and is focused on repealing, repairing, and replacing the health care law with patient-centered reforms that increase access to care and decrease costs.”

And Caitlin Teare, a spokeswoman for Rep. Dina Titus, D-Nev., said Titus would “carefully review” any legislation that comes before the House, but she’s focused now on “implementing the Affordable Care Act and helping thousands of uninsured Southern Nevadans get coverage.”

But lawmakers should reconsider, single-payer advocates say.

One upside would be simplicity, said Laura Martin, communications director for single-payer supporter Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada. Some doctors spend as much as a third of their overhead dealing with insurance documents. One payer would slash that expense. It would also make life easier for consumers, who would no longer have to pore through reams of paperwork to figure out which insurer covers what.

Then there’s the moral aspect, Martin said.

“Thousands of Americans die every year because they don’t have health care coverage. We live in one of the best countries in the world. People shouldn’t be dying for such a superficial reason,” she said.

Consumers would also see savings, Martin said, because they’d no longer have to shell out hundreds of dollars a month in premiums and co-pays.

But that’s only because they’d be forking over that much and more in higher income taxes to support a government system, countered Frank Nolimal, an employee benefits adviser at local insurance broker Assurance Ltd.

Plus, those higher taxes might not even be enough, Nolimal said. Medicare trustees reported in May that the system has $34 trillion in unfunded liabilities — benefit promises made without revenue to cover — over the next 75 years. And that’s just for folks older than 65. What happens when you put all 315 million Americans on the system?

“It’s impossible. It just cannot be done,” Nolimal said.

What’s more, many countries with single-payer systems are turning toward privatization, Nolimal said. In 2005 the Canadian Supreme Court ruled that country’s yearslong wait times for basic care such as hip transplants violated human rights, and repealed Quebec’s ban on purchasing private insurance.

It’s also important to note that a report card from the American Medical Association found that Medicare was the biggest claims denier among major U.S. insurers. The agency denied 4.92 percent of claims in 2013, compared with Anthem’s 2.64 percent, Cigna’s 0.54 percent and UnitedHealthcare’s 1.18 percent. Having one payer with no competition and little legal liability would give that payer even more power to deny care, particularly among vulnerable high users such as seniors and premature babies, Nolimal said.

Still, the country can figure it out, Martin said.

“We always have more than enough money to go to war, or to give billions of dollars in tax cuts to corporations who create jobs that pay poverty-level wages,” she said. “But we never seem to have enough money to provide services like health care. It’s about building a strong country. If people are well, they can be educated. They can go to work.”