General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs it insulting Bernie when we require him to fight for ACA instead of pushing progressive dreams ?
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=95998168 votes, 1 pass | Time left: Unlimited | |
No - Bad timing of his Bill and lack of specifics on funding, cementing GOP to repeal Obamacare | |
6 (75%) |
|
Yes | |
2 (25%) |
|
1 DU member did not wish to select any of the options provided. | |
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll |
JI7
(89,264 posts)Fighting to save ACA ?
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)have is a Democratic quest only? Medicaid goes down, pre-existing comes back, kids kicked off of insurance...no well care and poor people start dying...only Medicaid goes too so more die...this is a repeal bill. And ask yourself this. What Democratic numbers in Congress will it take to ever have any sort of healthcare again? It could be years...this is about saving lives and not giving up our one shot at universal coverage because if the ACA goes, I don't think we will ever get it...millions of lives are stake. That should be important to all progressives regardless of whom they support.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)Autumn
(45,120 posts)Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, Sheldon Whitehouse, Brian Schatz, Cory Booker Jeff Merkley, Ed Markey, Mazie Hirono, Tammy Baldwin, and Richard Blumenthal ?
i haven't seen anyone suggesting that they aren't fighting for the ACA yet they signed on and are pushing those progressive dreams too. That's an insult in itself and a real obvious one at that.
CherokeeFiddle
(297 posts)We aren't one dimensional.
Lucky Luciano
(11,258 posts)CherokeeFiddle
(297 posts)Lucky Luciano
(11,258 posts)pangaia
(24,324 posts)I almost said the same thing elsewhere but...it just seemed too freakin obvious.
CherokeeFiddle
(297 posts)It would still be like 1845 if all we did is talk about 1 issue at a time and fought as such
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Sarcasm , subtly, tongue in cheek.. too often missed by too many.
Voltaire2
(13,154 posts)kacekwl
(7,021 posts)Why not. Knock it off people get together.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)that you agree with the GOP in this if not how it should be replaced... We should never have done this. It was the wrong message to send during the fight to save the only health care we have...that millions need.
CherokeeFiddle
(297 posts)Single payer needed to be introduced. NOW.
The majority of American's want single payer and it is a very popular issue and I think after reading all your responses on several different threads that you are failing to see the bigger picture of what is all happening here.
This isn't just about the one dynamic of health care that is truly universal but goes a lot farther and is a whole lot deeper. As it stands right now today. we are less than 29% of the total electorate and millions have left the party. We have suffered massive losses in all sorts of races across the country on local, state and federal level. A full two-thirds of American's now say that our party is out of touch.
This is a midterm and 2020 issue and it is a lightning bolt to motivate and get people to the polls to vote in both those elections. Right now, it is one of the biggest defining issues for the American people who firmly believe that single payer should replace the ACA, and this is how you win elections.
You speak to the needs to the general populace. It has been said by many that our party doesn't have a message. Well guess what, here it is, clearly, loudly, and in your face that we DO have a message! The exact thing which motivates people to vote, the majority of which don't want something to vote against but VOTE FOR.
Under single payer, millions will be covered and this fight won't happen over night. It's a long process and one that will take time. It will continue even if Bernie's bill is defeated and is a conversation that has to start at some point, so why not now? The sooner it begins the better because we'll be digging our heels in for a long time over the battle for it.
Arazi
(6,829 posts)This is a false and divisive meme. You obviously didn't listen to ANY of the bill's sponsors who said they're going to walk and chew gum - fight for the ACA AND work towards single payer.
Your OP is factually incorrect and divisive as hell just as we need to be mending this rift.
Stop. Please
pangaia
(24,324 posts)Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)helpful in the battle to save the ACA?
Arazi
(6,829 posts)Dems need great ideas to win over voters. Our party is shrinking.
We can and must do both - work to save ACA now and message "Medicare for all" for the future. Clearly there's a lot of Dem leadership who agrees with Bernie from John Conyers to Elizabeth Warren
mucifer
(23,565 posts)added to the initial bill?
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)succeed. It says..."hey both parties believe in repeal" ...just not the details. The single payer bill should never have been offered at this time when we are fighting to save the only healthcare we have. How many won't call their congressman or Senator because they now are convinced single payer is around the corner if the ACA is repealed? But it isn't...if we lose the ACA, we are talking decades most likely before we get anything.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)It looks to me like another rhetorical post I read recently.
UTUSN
(70,740 posts)global1
(25,270 posts)settling for less when he was negotiating ACA. Many thought that he caved and gave up ground and that he should have been a more forceful negotiator.
Shooting for a Medicare For All (MFA) program now may not be the best timing. However, with MFA as the starting point it then seems more reasonable in negotiations for the other side to agree instead with improvements to ACA as a good compromise.
Once we have an improved ACA it can be used for the springboard to a MFA plan.
As much as I'd like to go straight to Bernie's plan I would think we'd need to take back the House & Senate in 2018 and then the Presidency in 2020.
Cirque du So-What
(25,973 posts)'You're either with us or against us' is not helpful.
fescuerescue
(4,448 posts)In fact. He rarely calls me before making a decision.
lunamagica
(9,967 posts)mythology
(9,527 posts)You take it as an established fact that pushing for this is inherently going to lead to not voting to protect the ACA against whatever the Republican plan is. I'm going to go out on a limb and say Sanders and all of the cosponsors are going to vote against the Republican plan.
Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)You don't like single payer. Jesus fucking christ.
flamingdem
(39,321 posts).. enough said
SMC22307
(8,090 posts)GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)when you think they believe that ANYONE but people engaging in an anti-Sanders vendetta is actually buying the idea that supporting the Medicare for All bill has any relationship whatsoever to fighting to preserve the ACA, much less that it is an either/or question.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)ACA. Who doesn't support universal coverage? But right now we need to save the ACA...and say what you want...we put out our own replacement bill when we offered the single payer bill...we signaled we want replacement too. Hardly a good idea during what should be the fight to save the ACA and healthcare for millions.
Ms. Toad
(34,087 posts)It's that simple.
Bills are introduced all the time that go nowhere. Once they grow legs, put your energy into them - or not.
For now my daughter needs you to put your energy into fighting the ACA repeal efforts, rather than trashing a bill that keeps an idea in the public eye - but is not going anywhere at the moment.
There are people who are not aware the repeal ACA effort has grown another head. Promote efforts to call and oppose that, rather than bemoaning the introduction of more than 1000 bills this congress - most of which are introduce to promote ideas, rather than having an expectation they will go anywhere in the near future.
I'm directing this specifically to you, since I see you spending a lot of time in these threads bashing the introduction of a bill that has zero chances of going anywhere soon, rather than (or at least more than) rallying the troops to oppose the ACA repeal. Just ignore the Sanders bill - giving it so much attention only feeds the chances that it actually will detract from the immediate need to repeal the ACA.
GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)Is exactly what you and the other opponents of this bill have to back up your claim that it hurts our efforts to repair and save the ACA. In other words, it's an opinion, nothing more.
The ACA will, with Trump in the Whitehouse, crash and burn. As far as coverage for people who were left out of the insurance market, read: "the working poor," it was mortally wounded when the Supreme Court upheld it solely under the federal government's taxing authority AND declared the Medicaid payment incentive unconstitutional. It was then crippled when Red State governments refused to expand Medicaid and did not get punished at the polls for it for it. As for the insurance companies, reluctant "partners" at best from the start anyway, it became a "no go" the minute Marco Rubio killed the pools. As written, the ACA was one of the most remarkable bills ever passed and, as passed, would have worked without excluding the very people it was designed to bring into the fold of "the insured." With a brilliant president like Barack Obama patching it through executive order and if we could have turned some Red States turning into Blue States, the ACA's primary goal of expanding coverage for medical expenses to people who lacked it before could have still succeeded even with these wounds. We don't have that. The working poor, already suffering from the double blow of not getting covered by Medicaid (as they were supposed to) and not being eligible for subsidies (which they were not supposed to get under the ACA because they were supposed to be covered by Medicaid as the bill was originally written) are going to be crucified when Trump executive orders replace Obama executive orders.
When that happens, what will we run on? Can you fit the explanation why it's Republicans' fault that people are hurting (which it CLEARLY is) into a 60 second campaign ad?
On the other hand, with Medicare for All as our calling card, our ads become about us filling in the gaps for everyone and (if Republicans DARE to repeal the ACA outright in the face of that being our goal) them wanting to make the gaps even bigger. As it is, they get to point to the failures they have already gotten away with creating (which I described above) and the only thing we have is "we're for more of the same" unless someone comes up with a way to saddle Republicans with the blame they so richly deserve for these failures, but which they so effectively parried at the time they were creating them
THIS is why all three of our putative frontrunners for the 2020 presidential nomination and practically every rising star in our party stand proudly behind this bill. THIS is why after years of being relegated to the back bench by the vast majority of House Democrats, John Conyers now has over 110 co-sponsors for his single-payer plan. THIS is why even the architect of the ACA says single-payer's time has come.
It's not only a just policy, it's also great politics EVEN IF IT DOESN'T BECOME LAW UNTIL WE TAKE BACK OUR GOVERNMENT.
This is also why I question the motives of people who are doing their very best to make sure it never sees the light of day.
Demsrule86
(68,667 posts)Ms. Toad
(34,087 posts)There is nothing wrong wtih doing both. The immediate need, obviously, is to make sure the ACA is not repealed - but long term, there is nothing wrong with having proposals for single-payer in on the table.
The insistence that progressives can't walk and chew gum at the same kind is insulting.
I called the senator whose vote will make a difference on Friday, and will continue to call him, to urge him to vote no on Graham-Cassidy. I also support the introduction of fixes (bipartisan or otherwise) to the ACA, single payer, medicare for all, universal care, and other progressive plans that are the only way to permanently dismantle the current insurance system that will always be pushing for bills that line their pockets - which means excluding my daughter for coverage. I'm just not actively working on them right now because the threat that ACA will be removed is more immediate.
See how easy that is?
G_j
(40,370 posts)on the push-pull, thanks