With Power to Kneecap Bold Demand, Incoming Democratic Tax Committee Chair Says Medicare...

[guillaumeb]

With Power to Kneecap Bold Demand, Incoming Democratic Tax Committee Chair Says Medicare for All 'Not Realistic'

From the article:

As progressive House Democrats strategize and push for a vote on Medicare for All legislation as soon as possible, surging congressional and grassroots momentum for single-payer could soon run into a serious obstacle in the form of incoming Ways and Means Committee chair Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), who has denounced Medicare for All as "not realistic" and will soon be in a position to tank healthcare plans that are unacceptable to his insurance industry donors.

To read more:

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/12/06/power-kneecap-bold-demand-incoming-democratic-tax-committee-chair-says-medicare-all?cd-

Not realistic Mr. Neal?

What is not sustainable is the current, insurance industry controlled, US system that monetizes healthcare for the benefit of the rich.

Realistic indeed.

[uponit7771]

1. Why aren't dems pushing public option as the MINIMUM alternative ?!?! I like MFA but if that's out

... of the question give Americans an alternative that the "free market" hasn't been addressing.

[guillaumeb]

3. Money drives what we call the free market.

And single payer reduces the ability of the free market to profit from healthcare.

[beachbum bob]

2. its not realistic in the short term, he is correct. Long term perhaps but its takes

consensus and we don't have a shed of that in congress at the moment

[guillaumeb]

4. The US system is unsustainable, and failing.

Many other countries discovered this long ago.

[uponit7771]

5. I'm thinking on the state level even in Red States MFA was popular, would love to see the polling on

... it

[Hermit-The-Prog]

26. not now, maybe in another 200 years?

Later is always the right time, if now is very profitable for a few.

[yortsed snacilbuper]

6. We need health care.

[guillaumeb]

9. That is odd indeed.

One wonders why.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

25. needs to be bigger

And a cartoon version for the deplorables.

[pecosbob]

7. I would say this a repeat of those that successfully moved the goalposts for 'healthcare reform'

to the right before ACA was negotiated. It was a freaking Republican compromise to avoid substantive change to begin with...
Sounds like more No Labels bullshit...

[guillaumeb]

11. Yes, it does.

It is allowing the right wing corporations to frame the limits of what is realistic.

[manor321]

8. We have to make them do what we want. It won't just happen.

[Wellstone ruled]

10. Oh this Guy will not be long

in that post if he runs up against the likes of AOC and other newbies.

[guillaumeb]

12. One can hope.

And citizens have a role to play also. We must be citizen lobbyists in this.

[Wellstone ruled]

13. Well,I worked here to get two newbie's elected

and health care was number UNO . And that is what carried the day.

[guillaumeb]

15. Agreed.

Here, we worked, and narrowly failed, to replace our Representative with a progressive Democrat named Marie Newman.

[pecosbob]

16. It polled very high here in Nevada

[Wellstone ruled]

19. Damn right it did.

Lee and Horsfort were the two I referred to. When one works phone banks,one gets the real lay of the land.

[pecosbob]

20. The thing that impressed me here this go-round was the follow-ups

[Wellstone ruled]

21. Thanks,the Team Leads were hoping for that type of feed back.

For me it was the Kid's,damn they ran the ground game and made it happen.

[pecosbob]

14. And hope it's not Ajit Prai that is in charge of receiving public response

[guillaumeb]

17. A nice one!!!!

Perhaps the N Carolina GOP can recommend some staffers as well.

[pecosbob]

18. Meanwhile we have to fight an invasion of the bots...

rumors that the whole caravan was ginned...

[3Hotdogs]

22. So, does his ass get primaried?

[guillaumeb]

23. I have no idea.

But an immediate tactic would be to contact on him at his offices by call, and email, and personal visits.

And to attend any events where he appears and engage him in dialogue.

[Just a Weirdo]

24. Apparently Mr. Neal holds little interest in progress

Time to remove him in 2020 and replaced with a progressive.

[Glamrock]

27. Not realistic my ass.

Raising taxes on the Waltons, the Gates, Bezos, Buffet, and Musk could raise at least half if they were at levels they were 50 years ago. Gimme a fucking break.

[guillaumeb]

29. The obvious answer.

And one that is avoided.

[brewens]

28. About six years ago I overheard some health insurance company employees talking

after a Kool-aid bash with their CEO. I was registering blood donors in their lobby. It was regular blood drive so I knew two of the three at the customer service desk. They were usually pretty sharp.

I hear them saying that people are just going to have to get used to higher deductibles and out of pocket expenses. I'm thinking for what? So your bosses can build a vacation castle? Then the big boss had to have been slamming Obama over spending, but I could tell they were confusing deficit with debt, so mostly that was just attempting to babble what they had just heard.

None of those women have jobs now. You cannot go in and pay a bill or anything there. No customer service in this town.

[guillaumeb]

30. All a part of a dysfunctional system.

And many US citizens are conditioned into thinking that this is the best that can be done. While the rest of the world knows how to fix the problem, many US politicians pretend that there is no solution.

[brewens]

31. When they were putting together the ACA, I was hoping to see health insurance company stocks tank.

That would have told me we were onto something.

[guillaumeb]

33. It would have been a strong indicator.

But their lobbyists were there for the crafting of the Bill.

[shanny]

32. Are Dems trying to commit suicide right alongside of pukes?

Srsly, WTF? Do they think--does this one think--that being not-as-bad as dFuckingt will be good enough?

Just shoot me now.

[guillaumeb]

34. THere is a difference of opinion on what is possible,

and what is desirable.

My view.

[shanny]

35. Sure.

And we'll never get anywhere near what is desirable if we start by assuming it isn't possible.

[guillaumeb]

36. Well said. Nothing to add to that. eom

[superpatriotman]

37. Who is this guy?

And why is he in charge of important decisions on healthcare if he's beholden to insurance money?

This seems like a no-brainer.

[guillaumeb]

38. All a part of framing the debate.

And in a money driven system, this is inevitable.

[GulfCoast66]

39. Medicare for all and universal coverage is not one and the same

The clearest way to universal coverage like they have in many European systems is an expansion of the now Popular ACA. Keeping in mind single payer is not the rule in some of the best healthcare systems is the world like France and Germany.

The thing that never gets discussed when saying single payer is a slam dunk is the percentage of Americans who get their healthcare primarily thru their employer. They will not give that up for an unknown. And yes, I know all the arguments about how in the long run it would better. Birds in the Bush vs the one in hand.

They key is make insurance nonprofit as most other countries do. And that does not necessarily mean the government acts as the primary insurer. But thru progressive taxation with tax brackets up to 60-70% we can fund this if we do not let the employers off the hook.

My company pays over 10k for my healthcare and does the same for around 50k employees in Florida. They will not give that up for a promise of better. Fortunately there are was to keep the skeleton of the system and make it cover everyone with subsidies of up to 100% for those that need it.

All that said, this guy is a poor messenger.

Had he said our goal is affordable healthcare for all Americans with limited out of pocket cost for those that can afford it and full subsidies for those who can’t, we would not be all stirred up.

We finally have a popular ACA. Let’s use it, not trash it.

Nothing will rip our party apart more than making single payer a litmus test for being a member of the Democratic Party.

[guillaumeb]

40. About 56% of US citizens are covered by employer based plans.

But that does not say how good those pans are, or how much they pay for the coverage that they get.

And that leaves 44% who have other coverage.

The ACA was designed to allow insurance companies to monetize the healthcare system. They are tremendously profitable.


And the Canadian system gets better results for 1/2 the cost.

[GulfCoast66]

41. And the French system is often rated even better

And much easier to achieve from where we are now.

And you make my point. Over half of Americans get their insurance thru their employers. And even with the ratfuckery that the Republicans have done with the system those plans have pretty stringent requirements.

And reread my thread. I agree about the insurance companies. But we have had non profit insurance companies in the past, can have they again. It is how France does it. Because those 56% of Americans will vote against any party that they see threatening their health care.

Even turning the ACA into a European style system will be a heavy lift. Convincing Americans to jettison everything and start over is not going to happen. In my opinion, of course.

Finally, until we cut or ridiculous military budget the funding is not there.

My biggest point is that a good Democratic can be against single payer and still support government mandated and heavily subsidized, affordable universal care as a right of all Americans.

All that said. Single payer vs what we have now? Single payer, of course.

[guillaumeb]

42. I agree with your points.

As a Federal retiree, I am covered by an excellent plan. I pay $375 a month for 3 people. The Government plays 78%. But I know quite a few people with employer based plans who have $5000 per person deductibles.

And yes, we can disagree on how to make things better.

[GulfCoast66]

44. I have a $4,500 deductible. But I choose that plan.

My company offers other plans that meet he ACA requirements and have low deductibles and co-pays

We both have good jobs and no kids so our plans works well for us.

I have employees with kids who make less and choose different plans.

All that said, I hope all democrats agree our current plan is totally messed up and until we guarantee affordable healthcare as a right it will remain screwed up.

How we get there is yet to be seen and will be messy as hell!

Have a nice evening.

[guillaumeb]

46. And a nice evening to you.

I just read #43.

[GulfCoast66]

47. As did I. Totally messed up.

It is now killing the middle class. No matter what our final plan, health care as a right is the road to electoral success.

[guillaumeb]

48. Agreed.

Healthcare as a right, and not as an opportunity to profit at our expense.

[GulfCoast66]

49. Make that our slogan and 2020 is ours.

[guillaumeb]

50. Saving the ACA worked well in 2018.

Voters finally realized that the GOP has no plan other than obstruction.

[Cal Carpenter]

43. Yeah, well my premium going up by *50%* for 2019 is not fucking realistic either

and yet somehow I have to come up with that money every month now. When my spouse and I make less than twice the poverty level income.

I did my ACA application today and we are well and truly fucked. I can't take a chance on a bottom-of-the-barrel bronze saver policy because we are getting older and our deductible would be 5 figures, and after the health issues we had this year (2 emergency room visits, a surgery...) I'm not taking any more chances. So in order to keep our relatively decent (but still mediocre) policy we have to pay half again what we paid this year.

Fuck this shit. Whether or not it is this particular Medicare for All proposal or some other genuinely affordable system, SOMETHING HAS TO CHANGE. It is HORRIFYING that we are the only nation among our so-called peers without truly accessible health CARE.

AAAARGGHHH!!!! Sorry, I've been stressed about this all fucking day so this headline set me off....

[guillaumeb]

45. One thing that was proposed, or talked about,

is lowering the age for Medicare eligibility.


Sorry to hear from you this way, but yes, we have to do something. The status quo is unsustainable.

[Hoyt]

51. Until all the people and companies that make money off healthcare, including many of your neighbors

likely, give up some AND patients become realistic in their expectations of the system, Medicare-for-All is risky, perhaps even unrealistic. Now from a "what's the right thing to do" sense, MAL or similar is the right thing to do.

It would probably be smoother to offer Medicare as an option under the ACA to begin.

But, I really don't think the cost savings to anyone is going to be that much an improvement. It will be less, at least at first, but not much less. A family paying $1000 now, would likely pay at least $800 - $900 for Medicare a month. That is worth enacting, but the next year you are going to likely have a significant increase. Now, if subsidies still exist for ACA and were expanded, and Medicaid expanded in all states, that would help those on the lower end. It's getting those rube GOPers to agree to investing some money to get it started.