Am I the only one who wants Single Payer?

[Coolest Ranger]

Single-payer health care is a system in which the government, rather than private insurers, pays for all health care costs. Single-payer systems may contract for healthcare services from private organizations (as is the case in Canada) or may own and employ healthcare resources and personnel (as is the case in the United Kingdom). The term "single-payer" thus only describes the funding mechanism—referring to health care financed by a single public body from a single fund—and does not specify the type of delivery, or for whom doctors work. Although the fund holder is usually the state, some forms of single-payer use a mixed public-private system.

Now that we know what single payer is and I myself am a HUGE supporter of Single Payer no Donald Trump pun intended, who else supports Single Payer. I am of the firm belief that if we put that on the ballot, bet you people would turn out and vote in numbers for it.

[riqster]

1. I'm in.

Single-payer is the only financial model that works for this market sector.

[LongTomH]

2. You're far from the only single-payer advocate on DU

It's what we should be working towards!

[putitinD]

3. count me in

[KamaAina]

4. HELL NO!

[vi5]

5. No, a lot of people want it.

But Blanche Lincoln and Max Baucus didn't want it, and nobody with any power to weild in the Democratic party wanted to hurt their fee fees or put any pressure on them, so......here we are.

[Art_from_Ark]

79. Obama actually made a campaign video for Blanche Lincoln

for her 2010 Arkansas Democratic primary against a more liberal Democratic opponent.

[vi5]

90. Exactly.....

That, along with who he stocked his cabinet and advisors with spoke volumes to me.

[merrily]

99. The Party backs incumbents.

And has not been a liberal party for while.

[Art_from_Ark]

120. Yes, the party backs incumbents

Blanche was trailing her Republican challenger badly even during the primary. Her primary opponent, Bill Halter, was polling better against the Republican. Yet both Obama and Bill Clinton saw fit to stick their nose in the primary, where it didn't belong. Obama might have done it because he and Blanche were in the Senate together, but at the same time, I don't know what he hoped to accomplish by endorsing a candidate in a state where he only won 40% of the vote.

[merrily]

121. Clinton campaigned in the Massachusetts special election primary in 2009

Four candidates running for Ted Kennedy's seat.

Congressman Capuano, a solid liberal, Stephen Pagliuca, owner of the Celtics team and a Bain Capital partner, and Alan Khazei, an activist and founder of Be the Change, and Martha Coakley, the state's AG, a good AG, but not ready for a campaign for national office.

Bill stumped for Coakley. Emily's List, which works closely with the Party, dumped a million bucks on her on day one. The rest is history.

On the bright side. Warren defeated Brown in the next election.

I guess I'm saying, "I feel your pain."

[CK_John]

6. Does it come with a pony too?

[nikto]

39. No, but...

Hopefully, it comes with a couple of multi-Trillion$$ foreign wars.

America needs more wars.





WARS, not PONIES.
Amurka, fuck yeah!

[Matariki]

82. What a stupidly condescending post.

Why?

[eridani]

88. Probably hasn't been around here long enough to realize there is a :sarcasm: icon

Although it was pretty obvious to me anyway.

[Matariki]

104. In which case I'm sorry

I didn't read it as sarcasm and I'm *usually* pretty good at picking that up.

[Quantess]

92. Wow. I sure hope that's sarcasm.

If not, that was incredibly insensitive and tasteless.

[nikto]

127. It was the appropriate response to the sarcasm of portraying Single Payer as a "Pony"

I will hit back with equal or greater sarcasm at that sentiment every time I see it.













With extreme prejudice.

[Orsino]

95. I want my pony, too.

However, those who claim that single-payer is a pony are counting on your never having visited or learned about any other industrialized nation.

We can do this. The only thing in our way is the massive influence of the billionaires.

[merrily]

123. No one will ever know.

[HijackedLabel]

7. No.

Ultimate goal for me.

[Laelth]

8. No, indeed.

Single-payer systems are far more efficient and produce better health outcomes for the people, on average.

That said, the ACA is what we have. My hope is that it leads us to a single-payer system.



-Laelth

[grahamhgreen]

86. And now is the perfect time to lead us in that direction:)

[gopiscrap]

9. I've been pushing for it and working for it for 30 years!!!

[merrily]

124. Sisyphus, is that you?

[bigwillq]

10. Single-payer fan here.

[Peregrine Took]

11. If Obama had gone for it back then he wouldn't be in the pickle he is now. n/t

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

59. If the Blue Dogs Democrats in the House and Senate hadn't rejected it, we'd have it.

The president doesn't pass laws. Congress does.

[Change has come]

84. The President ran on health care reform.

And immediately changed it to health insurance reform upon his inauguration. We were screwed before the first committees were formed.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

94. And you know this how?? You don't!

[passiveporcupine]

73. He would never have gotten it

And if he had pushed for it and lost and nothing got done, he might not even be president right now. I think he did what he could. It was too major a change to our economy, and too many people who had insurance through work that was basically half priced compared to the rest of us, would have fought tooth and nail against it. Aside from the big money industries that would have fought it, just like they did the Clintons. We needed more participation from the citizens. I hope the ACA will do that. It sure is helping that the insurance companies have been cutting their own throats since ACA was implemented. Lots of unhappy people now.

[merrily]

125. He's not in that much of a pickle. People running in 2014, on the other hand....

[mmonk]

12. I'm for it but need some type of relief now or I'll have to drop coverage on me

Last edited Thu Nov 14, 2013, 05:11 PM - Edit history (2)

so my family can still be insured for another year.

[jazzimov]

13. Call it Medicare-for-all.

A lot of people are confused by the "single payer" label, but they know the term "Medicare" and how popular and successful it is.

As for those private insurance companies, it may hurt the economy putting them all out of business and having all their employees suddenly out of work. But they could start selling supplemental policies that would keep them in business, thereby having little impact on the economy.

[Hoyt]

31. Employees would just move over to Medicare subsidiaries of insurance companies.

Insurance companies pretty administer Medicare nowadays, always have too. Heck, 30% of Medicare beneficiaries have selected insurance plans in the last 10 years over traditional Medicare.

[PoliticAverse]

53. I'm not sure that most of the 'Medicare for All' advocates really know the actual specifics

of Medicare as it currently is.

[pampango]

14. I thought you must be new to DU. Actually, a British-style national health service would not be bad

either.

[TorchTheWitch]

15. why don't we just call it national health care?

"Single-payer" can mean whatever one wants it to mean (ie: the single payer being the government or the single payer being you or the single payer being an insurance company middle-man). Besides, the average Joe/Jane off the street is not likely going to know what the hell "single-payer" is. Just call it national health care which anyone can understand that it means everyone pays X amount of tax or no tax at all to the government for health care, and the government then supplies all citizens with whatever their health care needs are. Government owned and run hospitals, nursing homes, rehab clinics, etc. as well. No private for profit rubbish making a mint off the backs of sick and injured people. And for heaven's sake make dental care part of medical care. The only reason that it was separated is because dental care is hugely expensive and pretty much everyone needs it and needs it far more frequently than the average person needs medical care.

[truedelphi]

16. Yep, you and me and a few other crazies may be the only

Ones who want it.

I look at my fellow Americans,. who are starving for decent health care reform, and they haven't been offered a full meal, but a small sack of peanuts, yet they are ecstatic.

Difference between Single Payer Univ. HC and what we are getting is enormous.

What we are getting is the "ability" to pay a monstrous bureaucratic organization lots of money each and every month, so they can decide what treatments, procedures and meds we get. And all this keeps our "health system" thirty percent more expensive than what Europeans are paying. And we get less satisfactory health outcomes, to boot!

But after all, ain't it important to keep Mr Helmsley (and others like him) in the Big Bucks? (He has garnered over a billion dollars off his position of being a top CEO at his Big Insurance Company.)

[Warren Stupidity]

17. Almost all of us here want it. The majority of americans want it.

It seems somehow that there is some other agenda pushing at both major political parties that precludes even having a discussion about it. I can't quite put my finger on what forces are driving that agenda. Who could it be?

[truedelphi]

23. Turn on the TV, and wtch even ten hours of prime TV each week, and

You will get your answer.

Notice how various health insurers are paying big bucks to be on TV's prime time. Notice how big health Franchises, which control most of the hospitals we have as our "choices" are buying up ads as well.

And why would a hospital advertise? Most of us are tied into our hospital "choice" based on what insurance we carry. For instance, if I have Blue Cross or Blue Shield or Anthem, I wouldn't go to Kaiser Hospital, and vice versa as well.

Now think about it - do the heads of those forces want us to have Single Payer? Obviously the heads of Big Insurers don't - and the pernicious link between hospitals and Big Insurers doesn't get discussed in the media, but boy oh boy does it exist. You want to be selected to be on the board of a Big Hospital? You will find it sure doesn't hurt if you have previously been an executive at a Big Insurer.

So how can any local news team bring themselves to tackle Health Care Reform honestly? This discussion will never happen as long as the the money keeping the lights on a most TV news stations has as its source the ad revenues from the Big Hospital people and the big Insurance people.

[Warren Stupidity]

65. I needed a sarcasm smilie.

[subterranean]

70. Don't forget the Big Pharma people.

Seems like every other TV commercial now is for some prescription drug that you're urged to "ask your doctor" about. The pharmaceutical companies don't want single payer either. The U.S. is the only major industrialized country that doesn't regulate drug prices, and they want to make sure it stays that way.

[truedelphi]

71. Yes! Yes! Yes!

And the PTB already know that consumers don't listen to those Big Pharma ads. The American public is mostly sick of those ads.

So why does it happen that those ads take up so much of the bandwidth on any given night of the week? I think we know that answer.

[Lex]

18. Yep. Just you.

Seriously?

[annabanana]

19. see: Physicians for a National Health Program

great outfit

www.pnhp.org

[Paper Roses]

20. You're kidding...everyone wants it.

Put every American on the same plan. Medicare and Medicaid recipients too..

All citizens deserve and have earned the right to have access to health care, whatever our situation.

Even though I have paid into employer based plans years ago, I still thought it was unfair that others had to pay put of pocket or go without.
The real reality came when my family members opened their own business. Individual health plans were so expensive, no-one could afford to be insured and the new business had no means to provide any kind of insurance.

Fair? Nuts. We worked as hard as anyone else and paid thru the nose. I felt twice as badly as the others, knowing what I used to pay as part of a group plan as opposed to buying an individual health insurance plan.

It eventually caught up. Lack of insurance affordability was one of the reasons the business closed.

Whatever our station, we need and deserve the right to health care.

[Triana]

21. Hell no. I want it too! NOW. n/t

[brooklynite]

22. Bet you they wouldn't.....

Americans by and large are conservative....NOT ideologicially, but in the sense of resisting radical change. That helps us when Republicans try to privatize social security, and it hurts us when we try to socialize medical coverage.

Remember, ACA was intended primarily to give coverage to a MINORITY that wasn't receiving it from an employer. The average person may not be thrilled with insurance for one reason or another, but not enough to radically change the process.

[JoePhilly]

24. YUP ... right again.

[riverwalker]

25. absolutely

as a nurse, I am always amazed at how many people, including other nurses, who have no idea how the rest of the civilized world provides healthcare. So many are not even aware that there IS another way. I tell them about Canada, and Norway, that if you need a doctor, you just go, and never see a bill. They look at me like I am insane.

[busterbrown]

29. Nurses Too? .

Of course we want a Single Payer system and we need it plus help with Assisted Living Homes, Home Nursing etc.

Its the freaking Corporations who are determined to stop it dead in its tracks.. Healthcare conglomerates are reduced to supplemental plans and when people beginto understand the benefits of govt. involvement they will go after oil and utility companies.. A Fascist nightmare!! Or Koch Brother horror story..

[nikto]

35. Sounds good, but...

Too many Americans are asleep-at-the-wheel, believe in media-spread myths, or are just
not well-informed enough to have passion & focus on the issue.

That is why the dishonest opposition to ACA is getting so much traction.

[busterbrown]

47. Welcome to D.U. by the way..

This is the best site to get the skinny on everything. Many reasons people are “asleep-at-the-wheel”..
The big one is because that they want to be asleep and uniformed..They like their opinions on how minorities are lazy
and love taking “free stuff from us” and that the needy need to get off their behinds and find work.

People believe in lies because they want to believe them..

[tardybar]

26. single payer I am for it

[liberal_at_heart]

27. I'm done voting for democrats who don't fight for single payer.

[busterbrown]

30. Then Bring the Tea Baggers on? n/t..

[Bradical79]

91. Gotta love cowardly scare tactics

to try and shame someone into voting.

[busterbrown]

96. Yea, reality is a bitch...

Loosing the Country to Chris Christie or Bush III...Should not even be considered. After all only maybe 50 more tea bag reps might be attached to their coat tails... Ah the shame, I’m talking about!!

[Bradical79]

117. So its up to Democrats to effectively differentiate themselves.

The Republicans move their party right, so the Democrats follow along. When someone is anti-universal healthcare, they usually lean right on quite a few other issues too. People like yourself who blame voters for not being able to differentiate between the two parties need to stop supporting regressive corporate lapdogs. Unfortunately the motto of some of you seems to be "Hey, at least Im not as bad as the other guy!" It's a completely ineffective argument that simultaneously fails to make your case for voting Democrat, and reinforces the idea that it's not worth voting.

[busterbrown]

119. I’m glad you believe in your insanity.

Yea “stop supporting regressive corporate lapdogs”.. Are half the democratic congressman and senators in D.C...

So lets “distinguish ourselves” which can easily be done and see how it works out.. (See Ralph Nader)

All or none is your game? and the MSM media will call it the March Towards Socialism..

The whole process will take time with one district at a time..

And yes we are living in a dumbed down times... Its a fact...Just look at the top graphic in todays DU Posting.

[DissidentVoice]

106. So the "choice" you're giving...

...is GOP-lite Democrats or Tea Party?

[merrily]

122. That cuts down your choices a lot.

Unless you count as fighting for it introducing HR 676 every term, but never voting on it or even asking the Congressional Budget Office for the figures.

Supposedly, Congressman Weiner got a commitment that the House would vote on it. But, Pelosi went back on it, saying bringing it up for a vote would hurt the chances for Obamacare.

Hmm. I haven't heard much about Weiner since then, have you?

[tavalon]

28. What would give you that idea

There is a huge contingent here who believe that Single Payer/Medicare for all/universal health care is not only what we want but what we must have.

[nikto]

32. Single-Payer is the only thing that makes sense

Obama is paying now for his cowardice on this issue.

He should have at least used SP as a negotiating chip and
negotiated "down" to a Public Option.

Apparently, Dems are allergic to hard-bargaining,
and prefer to leave that to the GOP.

[Armstead]

33. No /nt

[mike_c]

34. no, you're not....

eom

[freshwest]

36. I AM. We have to get the Nordquist/Koch types out of Congress.

Countries fund their UHC through a system of high, progressive taxes. We've strayed too far from that model in the USA, aided and abetted by rightist media moguls. It is paid by an enlightened electorate, instead of the benighted voting bloc we have that opposes all taxation.

It can be put on the ballot in states as VT has done, and was tried out here, but it didn't make the ballot. In every state that progressive initiatives are put forth, they face Koch funded opposition.

UHC requires a national decision to be universal (national). The NID (National Initiative for Democracy) failed:

http://www.mikegravel.us/national_initiative

Note the spamming of the website by regressives in the comments. I don't know if there is anything using that concept of direct democracy now nationally.

Except for a Constitutional amendment, it won't work. That would require the approval of many states and many are controlled by regressives. These are the obstacles to UHC. I'm not saying give up, but it will require a lot of civic education to get it passed.

Do you know of another mechanism to allow us to vote on it nationally, other than a bill through the HoR and the Senate?

There was a bill promoted by Kucinich and Conyers:

KUCINICH: SINGLE-PAYER UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE PLAN

"When people tell me that national health insurance is the right answer but is not politically feasible, I tell them that the opposite is true," Kucinich wrote in a statement on healthcare-now.org. "Passage is inevitable - it is only a matter of time."

Kucinich is also for the second year now a co-sponsor of HR 676 in Congress, a bill sponsored by US Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), to enact single-payer universal health care nationwide. The bill number is the same in the 110th Session as it was in the 109th.

The bill had 79 total cosponsors but failed to get out of Committee in the 109th Session, with new cosponsors joining on each month. Georgia’s US Reps. Sanford Bishop (D-GA) [a centrist], John Lewis (D-GA), and Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) were all co-sponsors...

Much more about that bill at the link:

http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/news/0134.html

Perhaps it can be revived or revised to see the true will of the people?

[Brigid]

37. Of course not.

Obama should have started by trying for Medicare for all. Instead, we get this Frankenstein's Monster of a system that is better than nothing but is off to an awfully rocky start.

[ananda]

38. No.

And to be honest, I think most people would like it.

[ReRe]

40. Nope!

"Give me single-payer or give me death!"

[kenny blankenship]

41. Accept no fraudulent, corporate fascist substitutes.

[RC]

42. Single payer is the only way to go.

http://timws.com

[nikto]

43. WHAT IF?? COULD THIS WORK?

What if we allowed Single-Payer HC, but only on a voluntary basis, and Americans who didn't want it,
could stay out of the system unless/until they decided to join it?

Surely, we'd get at least half the country enrolled straight-away.

But let's be conservative and say "only" 100 million people joined (about 1/3 of the US)---We'd still have more people enrolled than Canada,
and many other nations that already have Single-Payer.

It would be a population equivalent to a sizeable country.

Wouldn't that be enough to make it work?

Why not?

Kind of like a "Single-Payer Nation-Within-A-Nation".

Why would this not work?



This could be the answer.

[Half-Century Man]

46. What if we put it on the ballot?

2014 national vote. Universal Health Care, 100% coverage, paid for by progressive taxation, no cap,

[PoliticAverse]

55. The US doesn't have national referendums. n/t

[Half-Century Man]

57. This policy should be voted on

I know. Just wishing out loud.

[PoliticAverse]

62. Well the US kinda did vote against the individual mandate and for 'must have a public option'

but that didn't happen.

[DissidentVoice]

105. To our shame n/t

[grahamhgreen]

87. Basically, that is a public option! So yes, it would work:)

[Jack Rabbit]

44. No, you're not. Why do you ask?

The priority now is to defeat the TPP, which will undo 200 years of progress of democracy. In fact, that thing may make it "illegal" for governments to enact single payer.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

45. I'm old enough to remember house calls.

[madrchsod]

56. wow you are old!

ya i remember those days too.....

[sarge43]

48. No

I'm on single payer - medicare and tricare and I feel blessed. Everyone deserves the same deal.

[silvershadow]

49. No. nt

[demosincebirth]

50. I want single payer , too. I, also, want a new house.

[Warren Stupidity]

68. The thing is that single payer for everyone is a perfectly reasonable, tested,

rational, affordable, approach to a healthcare infrastructure, whereas new houses for everyone isn't a perfectly reasonable, tested, rational affordable approach to a housing infrastructure.

I think this is what is called a "failed analogy", but I could be wrong.

[demosincebirth]

74. I didn't think that my

would have to be explained.

[jeff47]

51. We'll get there. And the ACA gives us a fantastic path to do so.

The ACA moves the battle for single-payer to the states. And that battle will be much easier in "blue" states.

Once we've won a few of those, the distinct lack of dead bodies piling up will let us win in more and more states.

From there, Creating a national system out of a bunch of state systems will be relatively easy.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

60. I could see it working at the state level, starting with the ACA and moving in that direction.

All that needs to be done is build from there. When people see how well the ACA is working in their respective BLUE states, they'll want more of it. In other words, people who don't have will want it. More and more will demand something like it. In comes the public option. The public option is the second step. And single payer is the last step. For some states willing to take the dive, it'll be easier to transition straight to a single payer system from the ACA.

I haven't bought into the Corporate Meme that the ACA is shit. I simply haven't.

And I'm not one of those on the Politcal Left who hate the ACA because it's "Obama" and/or because it's not the public option or single payer. I believe that we have to take piecemeal steps, one at a time. We'll get there, but it'll take time.

[fadedrose]

52. Greatly disappointed when it didn't work out that way..

But with this group of Republicans it is a miracle that anything was passed.

Sooner or later, it will be, after people get more used to the government handing health care payments. We medicare people trust the government to do their part in making payment, but of course, medicare is not free.

[madrchsod]

54. i`m on single payer...medicare

i pay around 100 or so with my drug plan. BUT the extra 20% coverage is expensive

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

58. No. I want it, too, as do many other people. However, I understand what the reality is.

The reality that we were not going to have single payer in this political climate. There were too many forces fighting against it. We need to elect more progressive Democrats to the House and Senate. That's it.

[DissidentVoice]

107. If you can find them

The remnants of the DLC kibosh many attempts to elect more liberal Democrats.

[Solly Mack]

61. More like one of many.

Myself, included.

[calimary]

63. Nope!

Count me in! I've hoped for that for a long time. We settled for the public option when it was clear the single payer idea was a non-starter. Unfortunately, we didn't get far on that choice, either.

[diabeticman]

64. We should have been the first country with single payer. We deserve it. But until our law makers

stop looking at us as money to help themselves and their Corporate overlords we will not have a government that works for us.

[valerief]

66. Not by a long shot. nt

[panader0]

67. I'm the only one that wants whirled peas.

[harun]

69. We know it would be better but you have a campaign financing problem to fix before

we can even start the discussion of Single Payer.

Until that is fixed, we all get institutionalized for-profit private health insurance.

[kestrel91316]

72. Of course not. I think most DUers would prefer Single Payer. We aren't stupid.

But we don't have it right now. ACA is the proverbial half a loaf.

We will continue to work toward improvements in ACA until it becomes Single Payer. We have all the time in the world, because progressives aren't going away.

[TBF]

75. I want it and so do most folks -

but not the richest folks. They don't want it.

And that is where we are right now.

[Deep13]

76. no. nt

[Thinkingabout]

77. We would be dollars ahead with a single payer national health insurance. My friend

Experienced the French health care system, she fell and broke her ankle while visiting in France. Within three hours of arriving for care she had seen a doctor who referred her to an orthopedic doctor who put a cast on and was leaving the facility and at a cost of $36. If she was a French citizen it would have cost $8. If she decides to move to France she will be able to get health care for $10 a month and for $32 she could get a Cadillac policy. For a country which claims to be the greatest we sorely lack intelligent decisions on health care. Even the international health I Duran e companies are informing their insured to get their medical care somewhere else than the USA, it does not speak well for our country.

[PoliticAverse]

85. Some people thing the French system is the best in the world, it isn't completely 'single payer'

though.

[Thinkingabout]

115. Compared to the treatment or the length of time to receive care she received in France to what she

received in the US is terrible so judging from this the health care system we have in the US is not better than what is in France, France might not be the best but the US is behind France.

[JimboBillyBubbaBob]

78. It still remains...

...my choice!

[unapatriciated]

80. nope

have supported and wanted single payer since 1991.

[Matariki]

81. No, you definitely aren't

I really hate how things have transpired in a way that we have Democrats and liberals rooting for what was essentially a Heritage Foundation idea. Blah.

And when all the folks who couldn't afford to go to the doctor *still* can't get needed medical treatment because they can't afford the deductible of the insurance they're now forced to buy - then maybe Democrats will get it? I won't hold my breath.

[avaistheone1]

83. I am totally on-board for single payer.

[IronLionZion]

89. I've been a member for 10 years and still have yet to see anyone against it

Single Payer is probably the most universally accepted cause on this forum.

On the other hand, I still doubt how many supporters actually know what it means or even want to get into the policy implementation details or have plans on how to get popular support to pass legislation to move towards it.

My opinion is to do it the same way Canada did it, at the state level starting with small states. Vermont is furthest along as they have passed legislation but are still working out the implementation plans, financing, and other policy details.


http://hcr.vermont.gov/timeline/gmc

[LWolf]

93. Of course not.

I've been an advocate of single payer for a couple of decades, at least. I also have not pretended that the ACA was the right solution to the health care disaster.

[Demeter]

97. Reporting as ordered!

it is the only logical solution to the nation's need.

[merrily]

98. Hell no.

[Comrade Grumpy]

100. Yes. Single payer, and abolish those insurance industry parasites.

[doc03]

101. No but it can't be done, the insurance industry

owns Congress.

[LiberalEsto]

102. I do too! nt

[DissidentVoice]

103. I firmly, firmly support it...but too many Democrats don't.

However, I think many here on DU see the ACA as a panacea that it is not...and some see it as a "stepping-stone" to single-payer.

I do not.

To me, either President Obama was incredibly naive or incredibly cynical to believe that he could actually get any Republicans to support him in any health care reform. They said from Day One that their "job" was to "make him a one-term President." Don't kid yourselves. The ACA is very, very close to what Republicans (i.e., Bob Dole) were proposing in the 1990s during the Clinton roll-over-and-play-dead health care fiasco.

Perhaps it is better than the status quo, but a crippling, maybe fatal, flaw is that it leaves Big Insurance in charge, with all the confusion about deductibles, co-pays, what is/isn't covered and all the rest of the bullshit that has made the U.S. non-system among the most unjust in the world. Single-payer does not have that.

Another thing I am sick to death (pun intended) of hearing, even on DU, is that "the political will wasn't there" for single-payer. How do you know? Did anyone TRY? Or was it just assumed that the Blue Dogs would go with the Republicans (where they belong anyway) and say "no?" Or have even too many on DU been infected with DLC dogma?

I think the problem is one that has infiltrated the Democratic Party at least since Mike Dukakis got clobbered by Lee Atwater's smear machine:

SPINELESSNESS.

Democrats today are too afraid of Rush Limbaugh, Fux Noise, et. al. tarring-and-feathering them as "socialists," "communists," etc. to a willing listenership that would never support a Democrat anyway!

I am very, very tired of the party I have supported most of my life going increasingly, shamelessly "GOP-lite."

I want to see the Democrats stand up and say "I'M MAD AS HELL AND I'M NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE!"

[warrenswil]

108. Absolutely the best solution

It would solve all the problems.
Obamacare is far too complicated and saves nothing.
Single payer is by far the best solution.

[JEB]

109. Single payer is the best way to go.

And fuck the insurance leeches.

[BainsBane]

110. The problems with the Obamacare rollout

Only highlight how badly we need single payer. It would be far more efficient and do away with all the hassles we've been reading about.

[Recursion]

111. It's a good system, though I don't have the death pact with is a lot of the board does

If I were designing a system from scratch I'd probably move to something like an NHS; actually the FQHC expansion in ACA is more a step in that direction than towards single payer.

Single payer would be great; but then again a functioning system along the lines of Switzerland or the Netherlands (which are what ACA gets within striking distance of) would be fine too.

[lark]

112. +1

I was really angry when Obama caved and took single payor off the table and destroyed health care reform's best chance.

[Sheri]

113. you are not the only one.

i've been to the UK. the NHS isn't perfect, but it's a lot better than what we have, and it's cheaper too.

[2banon]

114. Medical For All would be Single Payer - The Infrasture is already in Place

Just need to change a few words -- and we'd be there. All of this would have been so unnecessary.

[scheming daemons]

116. Yep.. you are the only one. Nobody on DU ever advocated for it before this OP.

Seriously?

You are going to act like this is some original idea in your head?


Half of DU has posted in favor of single-payer at some time during the past 5 years.

[Iggo]

118. Nope.

[riversedge]

126. I have always advocated for single payer

[ladyVet]

128. No, there's lots of advocates here and elsewhere. nt

[OwnedByCats]

129. After a decade of experiencing single payer

I so wish we had it here!