The needless deaths are just part of the problem, as you say. The US health care system generally gets worse outcomes on almost every measure for a higher percentage of GDP than every other OECD country. There are huge numbers of people with chronic problems that receive very limited care - often chronic problems that keep them out of work so they can't get better health care, problems that under state health care would receive significant ongoing care. There are the issues about various self-employed people (especially creatives) who have a second job for no reason other than health care. There are people who can't change employer easily due to health care issues. Distortions of the economic system due companies carrying health care costs as a large percentage of labor costs (this is what made the US steel industry uncompetitive, for example). It doesn't even keep costs down for insurers - US health care has a culture of over-servicing and defensively testing in order to both defend themselves against litigation, and retain control over the process vs insurers who are always trying to reduce treatment levels.

The US commercial sector basically forced the US onto its current system decades ago in order to reduce worker mobility and make labor more dependent on employers. That turned out to be a bad idea for business, and a disaster for the country, as well as being basically immoral in its intent. Now no one benefits except basically insurers.

It is a disaster. The Republicans have decided to defend the existing system, and I think it is likely to be a disaster for them. Now they are probably committed to the wrong course -- if Obamas health care plan gets through, it is likely to be hugely popular by the end of a likely Obama second term, and as the party who opposed it, they will have given the Democrats a weapon to keep hammering them with.