Of course there's going to be a difference. The current quality of care, being the status quo, the "reform", which in the mind of the Republicans will be no different than the health care "reform" of Clinton (of which Hillary failed epically) and the complete whitewash of Bush, which landed a few senators into cushy pharma lobbying jobs, and the evil, scary Obama plan, which will have much better quality of care once the death panels start whacking all the elderly population that tie up all the hot nurses so they can give me a sponge bath when I get an owie. Which leads me to... I would not presume to debate you on this, because you are absolutely correct. In no way can the current for-profit, cover our ass at all costs even if it means overtesting and overmedicating the shit out of you system possibly take the burden of an additional 30 million people. THAT'S WHY IT DOESN'T WORK IN THE FIRST PLACE. THIS is the fundamental reason why it needs to be changed. I happen to work for a manufacturing company, so this tickles me a little. Yes, when you increase production volume, quality will drop. It will drop as briefly or as long as it takes for you to find the weak links in your process, and tighten that shit up. However, we aren't making doctors on the assembly line here. dmagicglock, you should know by now that this isn't about changing anyone's view, it's about a healthy discourse without all the OBAMA'S A SEKRET MOOSLIM! jibba-jabba that seems to be so prevalent nowadays. And if you didn't want to get sucked into a debate, you wouldn't have responded to my post. So seriously, how does someone go from using his national talk show as a podum to demand complete health care reform to vehemently defending the current system in 16 months?