@ISIDEWITHQuestionsHealthcare11yrs ago

Should prescription drugs be covered under Canada’s universal healthcare plan?

+
Expand
+ Settings x  

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 542 Richmond Hill 54 voters.

81%
Yes
17%
No
69%
Yes
14%
No
6%
Yes, but only for low income families
2%
No, we cannot afford to add this at the moment
4%
Yes, but only when a high cost threshold is exceeded
2%
Yes, cover the overall prescription costs but have the patient pay the pharmacy dispensing costs

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 542 Richmond Hill 54 voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 542 Richmond Hill 54 voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from Richmond Hill 54 voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @9F7WQT3from Alberta  answered…1yr1Y

were broke becaue of tredeau

 @B2BMK7Bfrom Alberta  answered…2mos2MO

Yes, but allow pharmacies to choose whether or not patients pay dispensing costs, & cap them at no more than $35.

 @B26DZ65from Alberta  answered…3mos3MO

Absolutely yes, but only if equal spending is cut elsewhere and taxes aren't raised to cover it basically canceling it out.

 @B23CRQ3from Nova Scotia  answered…3mos3MO

No, we should only fund natural medicine. Prescription drugs have shown to be addictive and can lead to deaths from overdose.

 @9LLTDD4from British Columbia  answered…11mos11MO

Yes but also certain vitamin and mineral supplements which actually solve issues. The pharmaceutical industry is CORRUPT. Natural health solutions are too expensive, while people are getting damaging prescription drugs for free.

 @9LJGNWT from British Columbia  answered…11mos11MO

No, get private health care coverage, if you want. No coverage, no treatment unless charity of some sort voluntarily steps in. Private coverage options should become competitive but will also underwrite each applicant and possibly deny coverage in some circumstances. In that case, a public form may be needed but paid for by the insured.

 @9GPVK6Gfrom Ontario  answered…1yr1Y

yes only when it is a high cost, they require the prescription to maintain their health and they cannot afford it

 @9GNXXXTfrom British Columbia  answered…1yr1Y

Have a greater discussion with the provinces and territories to discuss how it should be rolled out, and build off of that.

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…4mos4MO

House Democrats Filibuster Flip-Flop: Keep It When the GOP’s in Charge, Kill It When We Are

Filibuster for me, but not for thee. Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), an outspoken critic of the Senate filibuster, indicated Monday that she will not support axing the procedural hurdle as long as Republicans control the White House and both houses of Congress. “Am I championing getting rid of the filibuster now when the Senate has the trifecta? No,” the chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus said at a press conference on Capitol Hill. “But had we had the trifecta, I would have been, because we have to show that government can deliver,” Jayapal added. The Senate filibuster rule, which requires a 60-vote threshold to end debate and pass most types of legislation in the upper chamber, is seen as the best chance Democrats have at blocking the adoption of President-elect Donald Trump agenda – with Republicans taking a 53-47 seat advantage in the Senate and expected to retain a slim majority in the House. Jayapal, as recently as September, was pushing to “abolish” what she called the “Jim Crow filibuster.” “The filibuster was originally created *by mistake* in 1806,” she wrote on X. “Every day we don’t abolish it is just as big a mistake.”The Washington Democrat dislikes that the procedural tool makes it difficult for progressives to ram their agenda through Congress. “It’s the filibuster OR an assault weapons ban. It’s the filibuster OR codified abortion access. It’s the filibuster OR raising the minimum wage. It’s the filibuster OR protecting voting rights. The choice is clear. Abolish the Jim Crow filibuster,” Jayapal tweeted. The progressive rep argued Monday that passing a liberal agenda would’ve “built some trust with the American people.”“If we had had control of the trifecta and gotten rid of the filibuster to pass minimum wage, to pass paid sick leave, to pass many of these things that are passing – abortion access – that are passing on ballot measures that are so popular … then I think we would have built some trust with the American people,” Jayapal argued.

▲  226 replies