Why isn't American industry agitating for universal health care?

Perhaps inbred Boards of Directors influenced by Pharmaceutical Company connections?

This is old, but there was reported to have been semi-active industry support for health-care reform back in 1991 that - it was reported - got snuffed out by, essentially, a loyalty argument from the Republican party (i.e. if Dems succeed on this with your help, then the Republican plans to ease other business issues will be toasted by our irrelevance). Certainly there's more texture to the reason than that. Why that might still hold is, of course, a different question. Although, now does not seem to be a time for industry to stick its neck out for anything more than its own survival.
I do find it interesting that Sen. Wyden's list features Medical suppliers and insurance providers (i.e. I'm not sure I want their opinion on where their revenues will be coming from).

I agree with Marcus. The only thing I can possibly think of as to why is that all the other industries are scared that if the government successfully deletes and replaces the insurance industry, they might be next.
-
That's way to dumb a concept to hold up to concious examination, so maybe its a subconcious type thing.
-
Well, either that or its just a straight on ideological purity issue, which businesses are supposed to ignore in favor of making money but rarely do.

SDfhp,
-
Unfortunately, as we can see from GM's actions over the years businesses have a hard time ignoring the shiny little object in favor of aking money.
-
Frankly, there is no good reason that a business would eschew such a proposal unless they believe that they are more efficient at doling out insurance to their employees than the government would be???
-
Seriously, is there any other reason?
-
As an aside, a friend of mine and I have been having a vigorous discussion about the bailout for GM. Has anybody done an analysis of the numbers on which proposal would cost/save the most money with regards to:
-
#1 Bridge loan to downsizing over a few years. It could be cheaper than bankruptcy if the costs to PBGC, unemployment payments, etc. are too great.
-
#2 Cost of bankrupcty to government to provide DIP financing, take over pension and legacy costs.
-
#3 Benefit/cost analyis on universal healthcare or state-run pension plans.
-
It just seems to me that there sure are a whole lot of talking heads that are talking with no data to back them up.

Medtronic knows there are more and more kids in the future who will need their products and parents need to be ready for these costs.
The incidence of type 1 diabetes, a lifelong inability to produce insulin, is increasing rapidly worldwide, and it is also presenting at an earlier age- reported in 2004 to be increasing about 4% a year worldwide and the 0-4 age range of onset is increasing.
Genetically engineered human insulins have improved care of type 1 diabetes, and devices for continuous glucose monitoring may revolutionise care. A growing teenager may need 4 bottles of humalog insulin a month at $70 each over the counter, an insulin pump from Medtronics is about $6000 and monthly supplies for its use about $400 to $500. Then there is a blood glucose testing meter at about $90 in your local pharmacy and test strips of 50 in a box for about $70/box. 3 boxes a month means your teenager is testing at a doctor recommended rate. A continuous glucose monitor from Medtronics costs about $1000 and then there are monthly supply costs for its use........
This situation doesn't improve with care- its lifelong management. Who can afford this?
Your child dies without the insulin as kids did until the 1920's when pig insulin was isolated for human use.

Correction- a 3 month supply of pump paraphernalia is $400 - $500. Oh, and I didn't include the cost of syringes for when the pump doesn't work right.