Republicans and Democrats know when the American people are getting sold short. Facts are cumbersome things, and whether you’re a conservative or a liberal, they remain honest either way you look at them.

The need for a single-payer universal health care system in the U.S. goes far beyond the normal partisan traffic jam.

It is the best, most logical solution to the increasingly chaotic situation we are combating in ambulances, emergency rooms, and pharmacies across America.

Take these facts into consideration: the U.S. spends more on health care per capita than any other nation in the world.

The World Health Organization ranked the U.S. health care system 37th in overall performance, and 72nd by the overall level of health among 191 nations in 2000.

According to the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, the U.S. is the only wealthy industrialized nation that does not have a universal health care system.

The facts are cumbersome things, especially when they point out so clearly, that Americans are getting ripped-off.

The U.S. is nowhere on the quality of life index, because it has no basic, uniform system of health care, something that the UN funded World Health Organization(WHO) has documented extensively for some time.

So what is the single-payer universal health care system? The National Health Service was first established in the UK in 1948 by the Clement Atlee’s Labour government.

Since then, every wealthy industrialized nation has adopted some form of the single-payer system, except for the U.S.

The idea is simple, but well thought out: health care should be provided to every citizen, through the government, and paid for through general taxation.

In the U.K. you could expect to pay about the same for a better life expectancy; A lower infant mortality rate, a requirement for extensive maternity care, preventive care, and a little something called “quality of life.”

We all know what the argument is against universal health care. It costs more.

Actually, according to the “experts” those with some experience in the field of statistics, it’s cheaper.

A single-payer system saves money through reduced bureaucratic administration costs.

In the U.S., 84.7% of Americans have some form of health insurance. 59.3% of the insured are covered through their employer, 27.8% are covered through a government agency, and 8.9% purchase it on their own.

In every form of coverage there is a private or publicly owned insurance company between you and your doctor.

Since our system is not fully publicly funded, it is dubbed a multi-payer system.

So even though we are taxed for our health care, we still have to pay private insurers outrageous fees.

In some instances individuals are left uninsured because of pre-conditioned disorders.

In most instances, the average citizen pays taxes to both the government, and private insurance companies.

We spend the most for the least with a multi-payer system.

A single-payer system gets rid of the bureaucracy of insurance companies in the money making business, so that professionals can focus on the needs of patients, no matter who they are.

In one word, the single-payer system is efficient. In America right now, 15.3% of the population in uninsured.

Among the insured, 16% are underinsured.The coverage gap is growing rapidly. The cost of insurance is growing rapidly.

There are out of pocket fees to pay regardless of what kind of coverage you have.

These out-of-pocket fees can be big enough to put families on the street, and workers out of their jobs.

The multi-payer system is costing the average American more and more on fragile, inflexible substitutes for good insurance coverage.

There is a reason for all the give and take.

There are over 40 million uninsured Americans. Not only that, there are 40 million more underinsured Americans who won’t be able to pay heavy out of pocket fees.

This means the rest of insured Americans are forced to pick up the bill, either through taxation, or hikes on our insurance providers mandatory fees.

The cost of insurance will continue to rise, as long as there are 80 million vulnerable Americans out there, and that number will continue to grow as the number of seniors who rely on social security continues to grow.

Universal Health Care sounds like a frightening prospect to some of you. “Everyone included,” sounds like communism to some of you.

Well, it’s common sense. Imagine if insurance was not mandatory for all drivers on a particular highway.

Right now, 15% of the cars on our highway are starting pileups, forcing us through detours around wreckage no one seems willing to clean up.

At the rate we’re going, there will undoubtedly be more endangered drivers, more pileups, and one hellacious mess to clean up.

It is not enough to slow down if you know you’re about to wreck your car.

Unless we elect representatives in Washington who will fix the problem at its source, none of us can be sure that we’re safe.

The difference between actual change and tax cuts for the wealthy is the difference between fixing a wreck, and sweeping it under someone else’s rug.