I'd like to mention that I have seen this topic come up recently, but there were only brief comments about it, and not much detail. I'd like to offer a perspective that might prove more robust.
The parallels between my experience with the medical system in the military (Army, to be specific) and that which is under proposal today in health care reform debates, particularly when discussing details about a "public" option, are too ironic to go unmentioned.
If you were an active duty soldier in the US Army today, and you were to take a look at your LES (Leave and Earnings Statement, basically your Army Pay Stub), you will find a mandatory deduction, anywhere between $12 and $40 (sometimes a bit higher) per pay cycle, depending on how many dependants you claim. That's right. Tricare, the US Military health care plan, requires you to pay into a plan that translates into what I consider world class, universal health care coverage. For all you Vietnam-era veterans, this system is nothing like it was 40 years ago, and unfortunately it is much better than what you would receive from just regular VA health benefits after you leave active duty (I receive VA benefits today, it is a stark difference than active duty coverage).
One of my closest friends recently graduated medical school and is currently rotating through the military's burn center in San Antonio, Texas. He graduated from a very prestigous medical school, and is accustom to state of the art care facilities. The very first thing he said to me was "Never, at any medical institution I have been to, have I seen a more dedicated and skilled team of doctors than here. The head of surgery is probably the most brilliant person I have ever met."
So never mind that this socialized, non-profit, public health plan yielded one of the most impressive care facilities in the world. Perhaps you're just thinking, "Whatever, of course they take care of injured active duty veterans, if they didn't there would be outrage." So what about your every day soldier or family member with strep throat? A broken arm? Clearly they must suffer through long lines at drab army hospitals while beaurocrats rank them in order of importance based on how much pain they're in, ration their care, and then deny most of them treatment, yes? This couldn't be farther from the truth (although it is a good description of our chow halls, but thats a different story).
During my active duty career, I had soldiers that underwent both standard and surgical medical treatments, both routine and combat related. When you get sick or have a medical issue, you go to a doctor. Yes, if you are a soldier on duty, you are seen first by a medic (sick call), then a Physicians Assistant (an Army Officer), before your primary care physician. This seems impersonal, but it is Army policy, not a function of your health care coverage. If you are a family member, you go straight to your primary care provider, as my wife did on many occasions. The referal system for seeing specialists is far from a nightmare. While I was deployed, my wife moved back to our home state. She needed both routine and emergency treatment, but was away from her primary care physician and military hospitals. She still got treatment, got to pick her providers, and received back-dated referals for all her visits once she moved back home. She wasn't billed a dime.
I am not suggesting Tricare is 'perfect'. There's no such thing as a 'perfect' health care model. My point is that in this country, there is no healthcare institution more similar to Canadian or European models than what our active duty soldier's access every day. The 'government' runs the hospitals on military installations, and the doctors are either military officers of DoD civilian employees. The medical equipment is state of the art. In fact, the military was one of the first institutions to understand and implement stream-lined electronic medical records.
Some have said that this plan is no different than being an employee of the federal government on a subsidized government employee care plan, and that soldiers are just glorified federal employees, but I would argue against that. If you're a Postal Worker, you get federal health coverage, but you don't go to postal worker hospitals. The Doctors you see are not post office employees in blue uniforms. The military plan, by contrast, is entirely self-sufficient and self-serving.
If you want a glass of champaigne and a foot massage while you wait for your root canal, then it's not for you. But in terms of quality, affordable health care for the entire military population, it absolutely works. There is no reason that a simmilar system can not be implemented through a government run option in the broader United States.
So where are all the town hall wack jobs that are outraged by the government forcing our soldiers into communist medicine? Demanding that they be forced to go shopping for their own health insurance plans so they don't get euthenized by Tricare death panels! Maybe if most conservative talking heads like Limbaugh and Beck had the courage to serve their country, they would have experienced the benefits of a universal medical plan and gained a little more perspective into reality.
****Please do not confuse my comments about the benefits of the health care system described here with poor Pentagon decision making or policy, or lack of body armor, PTSD, or any number of contemporary policy blunders made in recent years. I speak to the access and affordability of coverage in hopes that it can be used as a model in coming months.