I think McGavick really shined in his interview with Mak. He offered straightforward solutions and answers to the healthcare conundrum.

On the other hand, Cantwell kept repeating herself, essentially repeating the mantra, "It's all about the children". She offered little in the way of improving the current system--other than saying small businesses should bear more of the burden.

At the end of the day, McGavick's argument that competition and choice (two free market principles) prevailed in my mind.

McGavick sounds like he is living in some sort of bubble. The "mandates" that he hates so much include things like coverage for diabetes. I work in health care and the doctors hate it when people come in with stacks and stacks of internet searches.

The "free market" doesn't exisit in health care since we don't have free access to information and we certainly don't have the ability to negotiate on the spot to purchase health care. For example I recently needed emergency surgery for a minor problem. Should I have gone from ER to ER to find the cheapest doctor?

The solution is to cover everyone equally and not to break the system down. The entire concept of insurance it that we all pay in to a system for the few high cost people that use it.

The vast majority of health care costs are incurred by a small percentage of people with unhealthy lifestyles. Most health care costs are the direct result of lifestyle choices. Should we not cover diabetes or heart disease for all of the over-weight men out there? What about making smokers pay for their treatment for emphsema or lung cancer.

The bottom line. We pay twice as much as most coutries for our health care and we don't benefit from it.

I work for a company in Wenatchee. Basically I am retired but had to return to work because of health care prices. I have found that companys in retail hire huge amounts of personel so that they dont have to pay for health care. They keep the hours down to keep you from having enough to qualify for coverage. We have 2 people besides 4 managers who get coverage. There are about 15 employees. I guess what I am saying is that it is hard to get a job where you get enough hours to qualify for benefits. So average working person cannot get coverage and the only way you can even get state assistance is to be destitude. Which is a shame. The retired person has to spend his retirement paying for health care.

Thank you for the invitation to comment. As long as America views health services as a commodity, subject to the magical influence of the market and competition, American citizens will have the most expensive public and private system in the world with the least impact on the quality of their lives. Improvement depends not only on who, how and how much is paid for services, but also the mix of health professionals within ones country. When countries are top heavy with specialists and subspecialists instead of having 40-70 % of their physician population as family physicians/general practitioners (not including pediatricians, general internists and ob/gyns) their citizens have a chance, spend less, and are healthier. America's ideological quest for more competition and more choice has become malignant to the point of putting the country in danger.

The simplest way to solve the health insurance coverage issue to to put everyone on MediCare (a single payor, federal program that is working moderately well) and make sure that members of Congress have their health insurance coverage through it.

What is Cantwell thinking?? When Robert asks her about what to do about Walmart not offering health insurance to many employees she starts talking about Starbucks in this state offering health insurance and seems to infer that we trust Walmart to do better. That seems very foolish. It sounds to me that Mike has the better ideas here as Maria is trotting out old failed ideas that haven't worked before. It sounds like Maria is the Republican in this race and Mike is the Scoop Jackson Democrat if I didn't know any better.

Ok so we got that McGavick proposed no changes and Cantwell had a bit more realistic approach.
McGavick may not realize that his free markets solution is the reason why costs are so high.

So the consumer Person A, has to compete with things that make them sick, all being other for-profit industries like the food industry, the polluters, the insurance companies and lawyers.

All these factors raise the cost of healthcare making people sicker and sicker, the corporations richer and richer more people becoming uninsured adding more cost to the system.

The consumer is esentially defensless in a losing battle of money, where these industries feed politicians more money to write the law in their favor.

Wal mart can bribe legislators for $10 million instead of paying for healthcare which would be $20 million for example.

Americans must have more of a financial incentive to be healthy, but its not what is taught to people. And many want to keep the american consumer in the dark so they can keep their profits and power.

The american consumer has been sold out by politicans and corporations, and it would take a great political willingness for people to change the chokehold these industries have on us.

We must reverse this trend by stressing responsibility, and having our companies want to insure people, which is what Senator Cantwell has said. If Maria Cantwell can help small businesses want to insure people, then the costs will come down, along with education about living healthier.

And we, the people, must also ban these mega-corps from buying the government.

First, I think we need to stop letting the insurance companies determine what they will or will not pay for in our health care that we gamble we will need and they gamble we won't.
Next, to get back the competative charges, the doctors determine what they think is a reasonable fee.
Lastly, as the end consumer, WE choose any doctor we believe will give the best care and whether the fee is reasonable. Then the insurance pays 80% of the fee and the patient pays 20% of the fee. The same would apply for prescriptions. You could even have a reasonable deductible ($200 a person) and a maximum life time expenditure.
This means doctors are dependent on the patient, not the insurance, for their business. It would be the fairest solution and would mean doctors would work with their patients for better health care rather than waste half the day fighting insurance companies to get paid for their services. Also, people who go to the doctor for a cold, flu or eye twitch may think twice if 20% is their share to pay every time.
OR we could put the insurance companies out of business and pay as we go and help each other out when some need more than we do. With no insurance premiums every month, we could all afford to help family, friends, and even strangers once in awhile!

I have wondered for a long time what would happen if the insurance companies were completely removed from the medical care business. Perhaps after cutting out the middleman--the insurance companies--we could all afford to pay the medical providers for our medical care. In all the discussions about uninsured Americans and the inability of millions of Americans to afford medical care, no one ever mentions how much money insurance companies are getting out of this business. How much is spent annually to support the insurance industry's salaries and benefits from the lowliest paper processor to the highest paid CEOs? And how much is spent in the doctors' offices on processing the paperwork for the insurance companies, not to mention the time individuals spend trying to understand the coverage they have and then trying to get the insurance companies to pay? I remember that it cost $10 to go to the doctor in Fairbanks, Alaska, in the late 50s. There was no such thing as medical insurance. Medical insurance seemed like a good idea at its inception--I remember when King County Medical cost $25/mo. to cover me, an employee at a law firm where I earned $600/mo. But do we really need health insurance now or is the health insurance industry the real problem--has it become a parasite, sucking money out of everyone to support the insurance companies' empires? And for those who won't/can't play their game (i.e., they have no medical coverage), those patients pay even more for their medical care, most likely to compensate the medical providers for the reduced payments the insurance companies make to them, the "preferred providers," those medical providers who signed contracts so they can play the insurance companies' game. I'd like to see a study done on this issue.

Recently I visited an emergency room because I cut my finger and needed 4 stiches to stop the bleeding. The bill recently arrived and although my insurence will cover it I was billed for over two thousand dollars. As I stewed over this during the weekend your show came on and I was really hoping someone would talk about what I think is really the problem with health care in this country. What I heard was disheartening from McGavick and uninspired from Cantwell.

Mr McGavick you refer to the health care system as a game that more players need to be involved in so that cost will come down. I dont want anyone representing me in any capacity refering to public policy decisions as a game. It isn't. Two thousand dollars to an uninsured individual is a tragedy not a game.

Ms. Cantwell small businesses being able to pool together to lower insurence costs will help people who work for small business but will not solve the real problems facing this country. If the people we are electing to represent us cannot comperehend the current urgency of a little more inspired thinking we will never solve any more issues in this country.

What is in my view wrong with the health care system is simply this. Doctors, insurance companies and hospitals used to work for me the customer and that is no longer the case. They work for an un-named investor class which might include me but has no real urgent interest in me getting services that I pay for. It is embarrasing to me that with that as a backdrop the only ideas we can come up with are to make it easier and more profitable for the system to continue.

Fix that and you will solve the problems in a lot of things today.

America does NOT have the 'best health care system in the world'. The designation the "best system" would be a system that ALL people had access to. It's completely humiliating to know that we're the only industrialized nation that does NOT ensure that all citizens are cared for. We have seniors who worked their entire lives who have to break pills in half in order to survive. We have people who cannot get preventive care, and it ends up costing thousands more to the taxpayers in the long run. We have health insurance costs rising at astronomical rates, so even the employed are having to forego insurance offered to them.

The "best system" is broken. It's does little more than enrich the corporations that control it. Access to decent heath care should NOT be a commodity. What kind of nation are we that spends 6 billion to put offices aboard the President's helicopters (no lie) this year, and lets working families go without health care?

My life expectancy is dictated in part by
the life I lead. In part it is dictated
by the affordability and accessibility of
health care.

I can live an exemplary life and one
catastrophic illness and my life comes
to a screeching halt.

I am unemployed. Wal-Mart believes that
secondary health insurance (family / spouse)
will cover the gap for those who can't afford their own health insurance. No. Secondary
health insurance generally doesn't offer the
same coverage as primary health insurance, thereby
making it MORE expensive.

Having health insurance alone does not ensure
affordable health care any more than home
insurance ensures you will be taken care of
in the event of a disaster.

Right now it is having insurance - having the
RIGHT insurance that dictates health care
affordability. The key word is insurance.
As long as insurance is the middle man and
we have lack of access to information about
the quality of health care providers other than
what they see fit to tell us, which is nothing
but good news, health care will continue to
be expensive and unnecessarily hazardous.

The majority of health care expense is in the
last few years of life. Soon baby boomers will
be retiring. That's going to test our system.
George Bush believes ours is the best health
care system in the world? Health care at it's
best should be transparent. Something that
happens behind the scenes. Not an overriding
concern which forces people back to work or
into bankruptcy as a result which far too often
happens as a result of health care costs today.

If that's an example of the best health care, then
one, we have a LONG ways to go in improving our
system and two, by comparison everyone else's
health care must be far worse than ours.

By comparison, there are lessons we can and
should learn from the rest of the world, in
terms of quality health care, but we don't,
and won't because ours is not a proactive system,
it's a reactive system. We don't spend money
until something breaks.

Affordable and accessible health care is not
something we yet VALUE. If we did, we would
codify it as we have free speech, freedom of
religion, freedom of the press. Having done
that we would then have a mandate and could
then work more productively on a process.

That will never happen because it would take
the profitability out of the system. The
profitability should have never been introduced
into the system in the first place. One good
epidemic will make mincemeat of our current
system of health care and will make manifest
its many flaws, just as hurricane katrina laid
bare our economic system of haves and have nots.

America like many families has a health care
system on the edge - a facade, a mirage, a
fabrication, an illusion. We all too often
discover its limitations at the point(s) in our
lives when it matters most. Pro-active, foresight
could fix that.

If current history is any example, it will be
reactive hindsight which puts the process in
motion. The question is, how much damage will
be done as a result of the inadequacies of the
"best health care system in the world" and will
there be enough will, resources, time left to
fix them?

We ALL have a stake in this. We leave it up
to health care providers, insurers, and legislators, literally at our peril.

There is not a single solution that will solve the health care problem. McGavick's recommendation for competition and choice could be part of the holistic strategy to resolve the health care crisis.

Create a solution based health care system:
Doctors are quick to prescribe a pill to mask the pain rather than resolving the problem. How many times have you gone to the doctor and they write a prescription and send you away without resolving or diagnosing the problem. It usually takes repeated complaints or a catastrophic event before the physician actually diagnoses the problem.
· Restructure the health care system. Each Doctor’s office should have a team of traditional and alternative health care providers. If the physician can’t resolve or diagnose the issue on the first visit, he teams up with the alternative health care team for a holistic approach.
· A holistic approach requires the patient’s participation and commitment to solving the problem. It requires the patient to take ownership and control of their health. This improves the success of the treatment and reduces the cost of health care.
· Health Care providers should be required to post health care statistics to the public. Statistics should include the diseases they have personally (and accurately) diagnosed. The stats should also include how many visits or tests did it take to diagnosis an issue? This also helps the patient manage their own health care and choose a physician based on experience and successful treatment.

Reduce the frequency of malpractice claims:
· Reduce the cost and frequency of malpractice claims by reducing the lawyer fee to no more than 15% of the award. The lawyers won’t take on false claims, because they aren’t profitable.
· Standard awards should be put in place for malpractice claims so people settle out of court

Cap the profit for drug companies and pharmacies
· Cap the profit for drug companies and pharmacies to 15-20%.
· Eliminate pharmaceutical incentives for doctors to prescribe their drug

Reduce the need for prescription drugs:
· Many drugs have an organic active ingredient. Prescribing herbal supplements and homeopathic remedies can reduce cost and the dependence on drugs.

Cost Management:
· Limit/Cap doctor’s fees for wellness care. This will help parents afford a wellness check for a child. For children and adults it establishes a relationship with the doctor and takes a proactive approach to health care.
· Medical cost and service costs should rise proportionally to inflation
· Eliminate price gouging: $1.50 for 1 tablet of Tylenol distributed in a hospital is outrageous.
· Place a 15-20% profit caps on medicines distributed in a hospital.
· Place a 15-20% cap on insurance company profits.
· Restructure insurance companies: Simplify claim processes, automate processes and reduce staff.
· Allow physician assisted suicide for terminal or cognitively impaired patients. If I have a terminal illness or Alzheimer’s disease, I want the choice to say my goodbyes and reduce the personal and family suffering. Why should I bankrupt my surviving spouse with health costs associated with a terminal illness?

Retirement Health Care Cost Management
· Give people the option to begin purchasing retirement health care insurance prior to retirement. This would be similar to long-term care insurance. The health care benefit would not begin until retirement or disability. The individual purchases medi-gap/personal health insurance while they are young. This will help reduce the outgoing health care cost in retirement.
· Give people the option to contribute to a retirement HCSA. Any remaining funds could transfer to a spouse or Childs HCSA without penalty.

Health Care Tax
· Add a small health care tax to tobacco, alcohol, junk food and fast food

The health care problem is not about the children. It is about providing health care coverage and a reduction in health care costs to all citizens including retirees and children. If you aren’t concerned about the rising cost of care, visit the National Coalition on Health Care website. They are forecasting a substantial increase in health care costs over the next 10 years. Despite Medicare, retirees are reporting that health care has significantly impacted or bankrupted their retirement savings. People of all ages are choosing not to seek care because of the cost.

Politicians have not delivered a health care solution. I think a list of options should be presented in a vote to the people. This will give the voters the power to initiate a public supported solution.

I tune into Up Front and I see a toothless old guy talking about his penis pump... were all the details really necessary Robert?

Ok my take on this problem.

First, I can careless what either Mike or Maria have to say on this matter. Both have different views point on it and still only reach about 1/10 of the population.

One way to fix this is to require all business and governments to give basic heath care to everyone who is a citizen of this country like we did before 1992, (yes it means get the illegals off of the free heath care).
Next, Stop the drug companies from charging us the price for making the drugs (or tax them more). Also think about the Hospital (a NON-profit industry). Make them chage less for their services, or make the services a donation, NOT a requirement.
OK now this one, if MIKE gets elected, do you think that the rates of insurance will go down? I don't, I think we will see an increase from 10% to 30% or higher for all insurance.
Ok, now that we have these items, we can do this, have insurance for the more advanced medical needed, except for long term disability (or do you people think that all disabled veterans should pay for something they got from the government?).
Ok and last, require the insurance industry to file with the Utilites Commission this way they can BEG for their increases. I am sick and tired of the corperations taking this contry over and NOT giving back to the citizens! WE are the solution, not the government and we need to demand our RIGHTS to health care BACK. If we don't it will only get a lot worse for all of us!

Only solution is the national/states health coverage. Health care should be a coverage, not insurance. The premium should be based on your payroll, let's say 3% of your payroll goes automacially to health care system across the board, just like social security. In this way, everyone gets a basic coverage. Less paper work, less confusion, much less cost. If you want additional coverage, you can buy it from the private insurance company. Most countries have national health care system which work better than ours. Why don't we learn from them.

The big problem with current system is pricing is spiraling out of control, but there is a long term issue facing socialized medicine. We have so many companies who have developed so many drug-based solutions to all that ails us, not to mention advanced medical equipment and stem cell therapies, we run the danger of bankrupting any system of free health care. What we need to due is regulate advertising to stop drug companies from pushing expensive, unnecessary drugs on us that leads to spiraling health insurance costs and regulate price increases. Drug manufacturers can legally price gouge, whereas businesses after a hurricane would be prosecuted for what big pharma does all the time.

I worked at Safeco when Mike McGavick offered us 27 different plans. This was for the entire Safeco USA. Which means that all 27 were not available in all areas. And it was NOT affordable. There was one HOM and that was Group Health. He's says the employee's were happy with it? I don't know where he got that from. You didn't know what you were getting as there were pages and pages of each plan that were so confusing. He destroyed Safeco. He chopped it up, and laid off hundreds of people. The more of the Company he sold off the more money went into his pockets. I never received a negitive reveiw until he became CEO. Then he set up standards that made it almost impossible to receive a raise. And the more money he kept us from getting in raises, the more money went into his pockets. If he is elected to the Senate, NOBODY will have jobs let alone health insurance. I am a Republician and he will not get my vote. I also am unemployed thanks to Mr McGavicK. I would be very careful to believe any thing he says.

Why does Washington state have a health care crisis? Good question and good news article. The media can blame employers all they want. Spin your arguments on the spiraling costs all they may. It won't add up to a hill of beans, or matter one bit. Very few people want to face the ugly truth of why health is sooooo expensive. Ask a doctor. See what he/she has to say. Ask the insurance company too. The answer will be the same. Medical malpractice suits. None of you have mentioned the shear cost of these actions. This problem has been growing since the democratic liberals of this state believed that patients should have the right to sue doctors and hospitals over everything and anything. American society has become so litigous that now the lawyers of patients look for the best lawsuit like shopping in a mall. This is bullshit! Everyone pays for these preditory lowlifes who try to enrich themselves over such things as the way a doctor treated their hangnail. Washington doctors have already spoken with their feet and moved to other states just to get away from this injustice and oppression. This blog article codifies why it is so important to have tort reform which is supported by the republican party.