Sherrod Brown pushes for Medicare buy-in proposal in place of 'Medicare for all'

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) on Sunday called for expanding Medicare to people who are 50 years and older rather than pushing for "Medicare for all," a popular option for many potential Democratic 2020 nominees.

Brown, who is considering running for president and who has said "Medicare for all" isn't practical, said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union" that he wants to "help people now." His proposal would create a voluntary buy-in to Medicare for people who are 50 and older.

"I want to expand Medicare to 50," he added. "... Now, if we get enough people, we will see a lot of people get in — in that plan, 58-year-olds and 62-year-olds that have lost their insurance, lost their jobs. We will see the success of that, and that will end up continuing to broaden and expand coverage for so many Americans."

To provide coverage to people under 50 years old, Brown called for fixing "the problems with the Affordable Care Act."

https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/430419-sherrod-brown-pushes-for-medicare-buy-in-proposal-in-place-of

[empedocles]

1. Quiet debate taking place here.

[Bradshaw3]

2. Good start and practical

Medicare for all is an ultimate goal and what Brown proposes is what I wish Obama had tried instead of the mandate, or a combination of the two. The power of the insurance companies and the millions who have good insurance at reasonable prices (say through large organizations) or can afford it will make a Medicare for All proposal right now impossible, although some are trying to paint their proposals as a starting point. I think Brown is just being honest about it and, like he said, trying for an immediate solution to at least part of this crisis.

[Freddie]

6. A Medicare buy-in for 55+

Was going to be part of the ACA but Joe Lieberman single-handedly quashed it, thanks to his insurance industry ties.

[guillaumeb]

29. An excellent observation.

Money talks loudly.

[Bradshaw3]

34. Thanks for the info

I may have known at the time but my old brain forgets such things these days.

[DeminPennswoods]

3. This would be an expansion of the current ability

of anyone 65 or over and having fewer than 40 work credits to buy in to medicare, either part A, part B or parts A and B, by paying the premiums.

[dsc]

4. I love Sherrod Brown

but I think this is likely a politically bad idea since those over 50 but under 65 are among those least likely to vote for us. Unless that demo shows signs of voting for us we shouldn't advocate a plan only helps that demo.

[radical noodle]

8. Yet this would be a very attractive thing to them

It's terribly expensive to buy insurance at 50+, and many might retire earlier than 65 if they could buy into Medicare.

[dsc]

10. and how did that work out with poor whites in places like KY, WV, and Arkansas?

the fact is that they were more than willing to take our insurance but refused to vote for the party that gave it to them.

[radical noodle]

23. Poor white in those places are motivated by other things

Nothing will work for everyone. Our rollout of the ACA was overwhelmed by the GOP shouts about death panels and government-controlled doctors and many people (even those who actually benefitted) thought they hated it. We need to improve our messaging.

[loyalsister]

15. What about the almost 50 crowd?

I think there are a lot of folks who see 50 on the horizon might respond positively. The oldest millennials are approaching 40.

[pnwmom]

25. The almost 50 crowd is almost 50. They would likely be happy that it would soon be available to them

And as people see it work, they will naturally want it extended to younger age groups.

[loyalsister]

28. Exactly

Many of them are seeing how it works for their parents. I think this will be attractive to a lot of those voters. I think he's really onto something here!

[ooky]

32. I think it's a bad idea because it doesn't address the objective of access to

affordable health care for all who don't have it.

[GulfCoast66]

37. If the ACA has taught us anything.

It is that the trec to Universal Healthcare will be a step by step process.

We are not going to switch to a system like France, perhaps the best healthcare system in the world, with one big bill.

It took them 40 years to get there.

[ooky]

39. I'm not advocating one big bill.

I think one big bill is a political loser. But if the belief that binds us as a party is that affordable health care is a right for all, then why don't we stand for what we talk about instead of proposing something that leaves out everyone under 50 who can't afford health care now? That just sounds like another meaningless slogan that doesn't address the health care crisis. I don't understand what's so magic about "age 50" when there are plenty of people between 50-64 doing fine on their employee plans now; yet, while so many under 50 are now either dying or going bankrupt trying to pay for chronic illnesses that don't have decent employer health plans to cover their costs. That's where I'm coming from. "Buying into Medicare at 50" sounds popular until you realize how many people will continue to suffer in this same bullshit system that Republican shilling has dumped them in. This will go on forever until Democrats stand against it. I want candidates committed to addressing everyone who has a need rather than just everyone over some bullshit age. Particularly, we don't need to lump in people who already have good coverage. For example, perhaps, regardless of age, when someone's medical costs exceed their ability to pay by "X" amount then we do something creative for that person, such as place that person on Medicare so they can get actual treatment, while letting the working people between 50-64 who's ability to pay doesn't exceed "X" just keep on doing what they are already doing.

[thesquanderer]

41. Or maybe it's more important to sway the on-the-fence voter...

...than to cater to those who are going to vote Dem regardless?

But I think the idea should be to use this as a starting point, with the goal to continue to lower the eligibility age over time. If we wait until we can pass something that covers everyone right off the bat, we might not get anything for a long time...

[Freddie]

5. I agree we have to start with small steps

Too many people have good insurance through their work that they don’t pay much for. Calling for an immediate end to private or employer provided insurance is not going to sell well right now. Many people would be disadvantaged (higher taxes, possibly not-as-good coverage) by jumping right into single payer. We all know that Americans are selfish at heart.

[TexasBushwhacker]

7. Why not let everyone buy in?

I worry that by restricting the people buying in to those 50 and over, they aren't getting enough younger healthier folks into the risk pool. That being said, it is much harder to find a new job when one is over 50 and part of the reason is that employers known that the health insurance premiums of an older worker can be more than double those of a younger one.

[Hoyt]

11. Only makes a difference if you are going to force younger folks to subsidize

older folks’ care. Not a good idea to pit young struggling people against older folks (struggling too, but in different ways).

I’m pretty old, but don’t feel right making younger folks pay more under the guise of spreading the risk pool.

[TexasBushwhacker]

18. I would still expect younger folks would pass less

for Medicare too. I just think Medicare should be an option on the health insurance exchanges for everyone. It should be an option for employers with under 50 employees too.

[Freethinker65]

9. I would gladly buy into Medicare.

I am currently over 50 and have insurance through my husband's workplace. He is in his early 60s and would like to retire within a few years. We have savings, but private insurance would be insanely expensive for me (documented chronic autoimmune issues which have been under control for over ten years). I was a stay at home parent that just recently took a no benefit part time retail job to get some work history and save some more money for future medical expenses until I reach Medicare age.

I had been depending on getting insurance through the ACA exchange, but Trump and the GOP are doing their best to dismantle it.

A Medicare buy in would also create some employment opportunities as many people would opt to retire earlier than at age 65. I know many people working just until they are Medicare eligible.

[Hoyt]

12. Better see the premiums first. Should be somewhat cheaper than private insurance,

but probably not a lot until the healthcare system is structurally changed.

[riverine]

17. The CBO scored the premiums at $7600 per person per year

when the buy in age of 62 was proposed in 2009.

[TexasBushwhacker]

19. That's cheaper than we were paying as a small business

We had one employee over 60 and his premium through Blue Cross was over $1K a month.

[ooky]

33. Neither are affordable.

[Hoyt]

21. 10 years of medical inflation makes that what?

[Nanjeanne]

13. While this makes some sense because it's less "drastic" - it does nothing really to contain costs

which are out of control. Allowing older people to buy into Medicare takes the burden off insurance companies as they don't have to pay out as much to less healthy people and adds the burden to Medicare which is already handling sicker people than the average.

I don't like the idea of Medicare for Some in any way - but if you are even attempting to lower costs even slightly - you should allow everyone to buy into Medicare. It won't really control costs the way a Medicare for All system would (with insurance companies providing ancillary policies as they do in other countries) - but it would help a bit.

[many a good man]

14. Incremental approach is best

But Dems should lay out a roadmap and timeline for universal coverage to avoid market disruptions.

IMHO the French model is most suitable for our circumstances. Insurance companies still administer financing but must become non-profits. All legal citizens get cradle-to-grave care. Companies can offer premium plans and individuals can buy into them. Both insurers and providers are subject to rigorous regulation and oversight.

Private insurance companies already are contracted to Medicare to process claims for them as kind of a sideline. This will become the biggest part of their business as Medicare gradually expands to cover all.

[Poiuyt]

24. I've heard the French have the best healthcare system in the world

Regulating (like we do with power companies in the U.S.) is the key. Doctors make a very good living, but not anything obscene.

I've also heard the Dutch system is very good. I guess theirs is like the ACA, only done right.

[GulfCoast66]

38. You are correct about the French system.

But it is complicated and not single payer because they got there step by step. Which is why it is the system we should follow.

Doctors are paid so much in part because it cost so much and takes so long to become a doctor. They have huge debt to pay.

I am not at all in favor of free college for everyone. But Med school should not put a person in a $500,000 hole and should be subsidized.

Just another example of how government could actually work for the people.

[David__77]

16. I don't think this will a great crowd pleaser.

Which isn’t to say it’s a bad idea. I think advocating multiple approaches, some more expansive than others, can work.

[area51]

20. Physicians for a National Health Plan

on a Medicare buy-in.

[Hoyt]

22. Follow that small group's prescription, we'll be sitting here in 2040 with no progress.

I agree what they say would be best, but when Sen Brown says it won’t work politically, it probably won’t work politically.

[RandySF]

26. Did #Electiontwitter set itself on fire?

[Kurt V.]

27. i got up at 3. i'll get up at 3 tomorrow so I'm tired.

if i can't say something nice i won't

[theaocp]

30. Why are we negotiating our own starting point down?

You negotiate with your opponents, not your base. WTF is this?

[ooky]

31. And what does he propose for people who still don't have access to affordable health care

that are under 50?

[JCMach1]

35. Still ignores the for profit elephant In the room...

It has never been 'real' capitalism due to lack of choice and competition/competitive pricing. Futility is doing the same thing all over again with the same negative results.

No, it's not good if we cover everyone, bankrupt the government and make the 1% richer.

Healthcare and capitalism are not compatible...

[ehrnst]

40. People can't wait for the fall of capitalism for universal health care. (nt)

[marlakay]

36. What needs to be realized is a lot

Of doctors and counselors don’t take medicare because they get paid so little.

The system needs to be fixed, the reason the large companies need to go away is to get rid of most of the admin and executive costs. We have to find extra money so the doctors taking Medicare get paid more, until that happens it won’t work.

There is a reason the same MRI here is $3000 and in Europe $300.

I am trying to find a counselor for my husband who really needs one, and the few that take medicare have zero openings.