If Bernie is the nominee, and runs on a platform of replacing Obamacare

[pnwmom]

Last edited Mon Jan 18, 2016, 03:22 PM - Edit history (2)

with his version of Medicare, including the $14 trillion cost structure he is advocating, then both the Democrats and the Republicans will be running against Obamacare.

To the average voter, who doesn't spend a lot of time on DU, that will send the message that the parties agree that Obamacare is bad and needs to be tossed out. The only question is, which replacement plan is better.

There is a serious risk that they will believe the Rethugs that their fantasy plan is better because they're not talking about spending $14 trillion or raising middle class taxes -- no matter what cost-saving disclaimers we put out there.

Adding a Medicare OPTION to the ACA would be building on the ACA and making it better.

Saying that it needs to be completely replaced risks losing all the gains we so painfully made.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/17/bernie-sanders-new-health-care-plan-is-his-biggest-attack-on-the-rich-so-far/

Last fall, the Wall Street Journal estimated Bernie Sanders' single-payer health care plan would cost the government a whopping $15 trillion over a decade. Sanders' campaign objected - loudly - over that price tag. On Sunday evening, just before the Democratic presidential debate in South Carolina, Sanders finally released details of his plan, including a headline price tag. It was $14 trillion.

[kath]

1. Thanks so much for your heartfelt concern.

[pnwmom]

3. I am very concerned that we not go backwards on healthcare.

[Wilms]

15. Then stop listening to Chelsea.

Problem solved.

[Fawke Em]

27. Single payer is moving forward.

Please check your weathervane settings.

[JRLeft]

30. Not to corporate democrats.

[madokie]

54. Then why are you a Hillary supporter?

We need a comprehensive healthcare plan that covers everyone and it needs to be a part of our Medicare system which has proven over the years to be very popular in spite of all the attempts to change it by the 'CONs. I have no problem with anyone or everyone paying a little more in taxes to get there either. In fact it would be the cheapest way to cover everyone. Medicares overhead is low compared to insurances companies. As proof of what I'd say just look at all the money that the Clinton's have taken from those insurance companies

[MrWendel]

2. K&R

[thomservo]

8. YES!

[azmom]

36. That's what was always said on this forum.

A stepping stone to single payer. Yep. Read that many, many times.

[Ferd Berfel]

57. exactly. nd let's not forget that ACA is actually the Republican plan

Until we get rid of the profit vs Health formula we cannot have an honest health care system

[TIME TO PANIC]

5. The fear mongering isn't going to work.

Have some respect for the electorate.

[thomservo]

10. republican tactics.

[TIME TO PANIC]

13. Exactly!

They have nothing else.

[Warren Stupidity]

6. Good. We will have a clear choice between a

candidate who wants to take a flawed system and make it much better and a candidate who wants to take a flawed system and make it worse.

[AgingAmerican]

7. Lame argument

[floriduck]

9. 29 million haven't made it to the basic coverage.

Even Hill admitted the ACA needs improvement. Whether it takes enhancements or a replacement program, it will be a political fight. But the voters overwhelmingly support something more than what we have now. And Medicare for all would be a federal program, eliminating GOP governors from declining it.

[NCTraveler]

11. He helped write it. I doubt he is going to fight against it. lol

He has no clue what he is going to do.

[99th_Monkey]

12. Rs & Ds both "running against Obamacare" is disingenuous bull-pucky

While technically sort of 'true' from a jaundiced point of view, Bernie is NOT
"running against Obamacare", Bernie's running FOR single-payer <-- GOP not.

[Kalidurga]

14. Adding a Medicare OPTION to the ACA would be building on the ACA and making it better.

Well that is the plan. So, what was your objection?

[pnwmom]

25. That is not his plan. He's proposing a $14 trillion plan to replace the ACA. n/t

[RDANGELO]

16. There will be no Republican plan for the same reason that Mitt Romney never had one.

That is because about half of the republicans don't even believe the government should be involved in it. Romney ran on on generalities and talking points. If by chance the nominee does come out with one that takes into account preexisting conditions, than they are going to have to show how they are going to pay for it, and that half will not agree to pay for it.

[world wide wally]

17. You just can't eliminate one until the other is in effect.

And you have to make that well known before you even start.
OK, Republicans... You want to repeal Obamacare? Then put single payer in place.
Done

[Skidmore]

40. And what incentive do they have to do that?

Absolutely none. They don't want either one.

[ancianita]

18. I get your argument. But the GOP's plan would be revealed as status quo return. Bernie could

easily be seen to compromise on a Medicare option that would solidify the likelihood that Medicare For All would eventually be the law of the land.

[ucrdem]

19. Exactly.

That was the point Chelsea was making and that's the point Hillary made last night, and persuasively.

[Armstead]

20. Okay, but Clinton thew the Public Option under the bus too

We triiiiieed it but its toooooooo harrrrrrd. So we can't do that.

[Live and Learn]

21. Hillarious to see so many DUers suddenly against Single Payer. nt

[Ron Green]

24. The emotional support of a slick but dishonest candidate

brings all sorts of crazy conjecture to the fray.

[Vinca]

22. You're exactly right.

A Medicare option to the ACA would let the people vote with their $$$$$. By and large, people love Medicare and it would only be a matter of time before we starved the insurance beast.

[global1]

23. Come On - Bernie Is Not Running On A Platform To Replace ACA....

It's a talking point from the Hillary campaign. Bernie wants to improve on it and actually get it to where it was intended to be all along. President Obama had to take 'baby steps' in getting the ACA accepted and passed. It currently goes a long way improving on the former private insurance model.

All those things we talked about here ACA offers: allows comparison of plans; cost assistance; no annual or lifetime limits on healthcare; can't be denied coverage; no extra charges based on health status or gender; can't be dropped by insurance companies; can't be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions; kids can stay on parents plan until they are 26; preventative services covered; etc.

But even with all these improvements -the biggest problem is that there are still a lot of Americsn's that don't have coverage and as it still remains solely for-profit and as such every aspect of the system requires profit that results in increasingly higher healthcsre costs than other countries that have a more universal system.

Bernie's plan will build on the strengths of ACA and will make healthcare available to all Americans as a right. Everyone will be covered. It will minimize the paperwork for providers having to deal with a multitude of private insurance companies and simplify healthcare coverage for everyone - essentially Medicare for all. It will simplfy the lives of HR personnel in companies that won't have to deal year to year finding a policy for their employees. Any savings they can realize by not having to deal with that issue - will be able to be passed down to their employees as a raise or a subsidy for their employees personal health insurance.

One of the most significant things that happened to me was turning 65 and being qualified for Medicare. As a self-employed businessman before I turned 65 - the insurance companies had me by the short ones. They were in my back pocket so deeply that at times I considered dropping health insurance completely - but that would have been stupid. Instead - I bit my tongue and paid their excessive premiums - knowing that as a relatively healthy individual that I was padding the pockets of the CEO's and subsidizing those that couldn't afford health insurance and were gaming the system.

I saved a lot of money going on Medicare - even with the best supplement I saved over $14,500 per year. Medicare simplified my life; took a lot of anxiety out of worrying about whether or not the insurance company that I was paying these excessive payments to would cover me if I did get really sick or look for ways to wiggle out of providing me the coverage that I was paying for. Bernie's plan is to provide that same level of coverage and to all Americans.

Anyone that says that Bernie is wanting to replace ACA is using that issue to make Bernie look bad. Bernie wants to improve on ACA and put our country - the Richest Country in The World - on a level with all other countries that provide healthcare as a right for all their citizens.

Any thing that is heard to maintain our current for-profit system is doing it for selfish and greedy reasons. To continue to pad the private insurance industry and keep us 99%'ers down.

[wordpix]

31. The ACA saved my life including financially

In December 2013 I was kicked off my private insurance due to a then new cancer diagnosis, making me have a preexisting condition. Thank you, blue cross blue shield, for doing this before my contract was up or ready for renewal, with 10 days' notice, while I was extremely sick and needed life saving surgery you are a POS, and no one including my congressman who called you, believed your absurd claim there was a typo about the contract end date.

Enter the ACA , where I got insurance and the surgery i needed. The ACA saved me, literally and financially. It has a lot of probs, mainly that the insurance cos., Big Pharma and other providers still have us by the gonads, overcharge with fantasy numbers, and give us confusing, opaque bills based on these fantasies. First, let's be able to negotiate drug prices worldwide.

[pnwmom]

37. Wrong. Improving it would mean adding Medicare or another public OPTION.

He wants Medicare -- government insurance -- FOR ALL, which means the end of Obamacare, which is a mixture of public and private insurance.

By the way, Obamacare is similar to the universal insurance in Switzerland. It isn't true that all developed countries have government run insurance as the only option. Even in Canada, the systems vary from province to province, and private insurers can be part of the mix.

[Prism]

26. "We'll fix it later!"

Was the plan that later never comes?

[daybranch]

28. you forgot to exclude the trillions of savings made posible by eliminating the 20 percent

that the insurance companies are taking now. So in total most of us would be paying much less for real insurance without deductibles etc.

[wordpix]

33. Speaking of %ages

Why not stop paying for the richies' Medicare and social security? They don't need a safety net if they're worth billions and dont contribute much to fixing the infrastructure they use for decades.

[tularetom]

29. Well, somebody better do something about Obamacare

Because its going to crash and burn if costs are not controlled.

Already some younger people are choosing to pay the tax penalties for not being covered and rolling the dice on health care. All this will do is tilt the insurance pool away from the young and healthy to the old and less healthy. Which will make the premiums go up, which will make more people opt out. Which will make the premiums go further up. Etc etc etc until nobody is left in the pool except octogenarians who will eventually all die off and we're back to emergency room care for everybody.

We can either sit here, pat ourselves on the back and pretend we've done something about this problem or we can stop trying to improve health insurance and work on actually providing health care.

[global1]

32. Octogenarians Are Fortunately Covered By Medicare....

they have a single payer deal.

The people that opt out are only hurting themselves because they will find no cheaper alternative in private insurance coverage.

How much are the tax penalties that the younger people are willing to pay for no coverage? Just think if they had to pay that same amount and get health insurance coverage to boot.

[tularetom]

43. The point is they don't care, their health care program is "don't get sick"

And if they do, they will go to the county hospital and we all pay for it. In theory I guess, the penalties are supposed to reimburse the local hospitals for the cost of treating indigent patients who don't have or refuse to buy, overpriced Obamacare policies.

OK, octogenarian was a poor choice of words. I realize they are covered by Medicare since I'm very nearly an octogenarian myself (well, 6 years away).

And my wife and I have $400+ deducted from our SS checks every month to pay for Medicare parts A, B & D.

And that only covers 80% of our part B costs. To cover the balance we have a supplemental policy which fortunately is covered by my pension. It costs $750 per month. On top of that there are all sorts of deductibles and copays.

[global1]

44. I'm Really Confused By You Dude...

You say you are six years from being an Octogenarian yourself. Does that mean you are 74 y/o? An octogenarian is 80. What do you mean by their health care program is "don't get sick"? A medicare patient doesn't need to go to a county hospital. Your just old - your not indigent. So your care will be covered by Medicare.

I'm 68 y/o. As a self-employed person I was paying $3300 every 2 months for Blue Cross/Blue Shield (BC/BS). If I would have tried to switch to a less expensive plan in BC/BS I would have taken a chance that they wouldn't cover me - even though I had one of their more expensive policies - because they'd find some excuse - like a pre-existing condition. This is because - even though they had my original sign up form with them and they were able to track my medical history - I would have had to re-fill out all the forms like I was a brand new customer. So they had me by the short ones. I had to keep paying this excessive amount until I turned 65 and was able to get on Medicare. Now with Medicare - I pay $450/month for Medicare; I have a supplemental from Humana to cover the 20% of the additional Part B charges. I have a Part D - Drug policy through United Healthcare and my drugs are covered - all that for only $450/month.

If I were you I'd investigate other Supplemental Plans to see if you could get your costs down.

If Bernie were to be elected and he was able to get single payer passed - every citizen would be covered by his plan - even those indigent patients that are now going to ER's for their care.

Also - who or what turned you against ACA (Obamacare)?

[tularetom]

50. I'll explain real slow so you can understand

1. I know what an octogenarian is.
2. Yes, I am 74 years old.
3.. I neither said nor implied that my health care program is "don't get sick". I was referring to those younger people who have chosen to pay the penalty rather than sign up for an expensive Obamacare policy.
4. I'm on medicare myself so I have a pretty good idea how medicare works.
5. A total of $450 per month is deducted from my wife and my Social Security payments for medicare premiums because our adjusted gross income on our 2015 joint tax return was higher than some number.
6. I don't need to investigate supplemental plans to see if I can get my costs down because right now my costs are zero, zilch, nada. I am part of a group and my premiums and those of my wife are paid by my former employer as part of my retirement pension. I suppose I could opt to pay for my own supplemental coverage but the pension would not cover my costs.

I have nothing against Obamacare. It stopped insurance companies from refusing coverage on the basis of preexisting conditions and it provided that young adults could remain on their parents insurance policies for a longer period of time. However, it is apparent that the cost controls adopted as part of the ACA are not working. You can read here on DU every day about people who cannot afford the double digit annual premium increases for policies they bought through the exchanges and if this isn't corrected, the entire program will eventually collapse of its own weight.

[pnwmom]

53. Medicare is also struggling with rising costs. Medicare for all isn't a magical solution to that.

[tularetom]

60. Never said it was, and it'll get worse before it gets better

We are only now beginning to see the impact of the huge baby boomer population on medicare and it will continue for at least ten more years.

My concern is that some future president, either republican or insurance-friendly Democrat, will attempt to convert traditional medicare into some bastardized Obamacare type insurance for seniors. How does 25-30% of the GDP being spent for health care sound to you? Not a formula for a vibrant economy IMO. Jobs are disappearing overseas, the population is aging and we're spending all our money on a military we don't need and cannot afford.

Sure, things will improve as the boomers die off, but we have not prepared for what is now just getting started.

[Jefferson23]

34. The average voter supported a single payer system, so did Obama. The problem

Democrats are going to have is persuading the public that for all the good that
came from Obamacare and it was a great shift away from what we had...but it is
NOT sustainable due to the costs.

Our unified platform should be to move it forward not only because
it is the right thing to do for all citizens but because the costs
leave us politically VULNERABLE to constant Republican attacks.
While a Democrat in the WH will ward off a veto, we must be
at the same time pursuing a coalition to fight for what will become
a cost effective health care system.

Sanders is stating and is correct the ONLY reason we do not have
single payer is due to lobby influence.

snip* “Between 2014 and 2022, the ACA will add $273.6 billion in new administrative costs over and above what would have been expected had the law not been enacted,” said Himmelstein. “That's equivalent to $1,375 per newly insured person per year, or 22.5 percent of total federal expenditures for the program.”

Himmelstein and Woolhandler write: “Nearly two-thirds of this new overhead – $172.2 billion – will go for increased private insurers’ administrative costs and profits,” while the rest of the added overhead “is attributable to expanded government programs, i.e. Medicaid. But even the added dollars to administer Medicaid will flow mostly to private Medicaid HMOs, which will account for 59 percent of total Medicaid administrative costs in 2022.”

They observe that while insuring 25 million additional Americans, as the CBO projects the ACA will do, “is surely worthwhile,” the administrative costs of doing so “seem awfully steep, particularly when much cheaper alternatives are available.”

By way of alternatives, they point to traditional Medicare, which runs for about 2 percent overhead. Were the 22.5 percent overhead figure associated with the ACA to drop to traditional Medicare’s level, the U.S. would save $249.3 billion by 2022, they say.

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2015/may/aca-adding-billions-to-health-care-bureaucratic-waste-study

[pnwmom]

35. Obama supported a public OPTION, not a complete switch to single payer.

[Jefferson23]

39. Oh for crying out loud, and what was the public option? Please tell me how

hair splitting is going to change the fact that Obamacare is not sustainable
due to its costs, and how we make a convincing argument not to move
it forward?

We are leaving ourselves open for more opposition and it makes no sense
to do so..all candidates on our side should be pushing single payer as the goal.

[pnwmom]

41. There is a difference between giving people a choice of a public option

and requiring everyone to move from private insurance to Medicare.

For one thing, there are already some doctors who refuse Medicare patients because they don't think the reimbursements are high enough. No one knows how many other doctors would make that choice.

[Jefferson23]

42. Most would have to accept it and a large percent support it already.

We have a serious problem with the costs now and it is not going to
help us bring them down nor will it help keep the Republicans at bay if
we ignore it.

Educating the public to get on board with a single payer system is not
the problem they're already there.

[pnwmom]

47. Medicare for all won't, in and of itself, fix the problem with rising costs.

Medicare itself is struggling with rising costs.

[Jefferson23]

48. Single payer will and the law that protects the drugs companies and does not

allow for the government to negotiate prices is a big part of the problem too.

Clinton needs to get behind this, as the vulnerability to Obamacare
is real, the high costs are not going to be reduced significantly
otherwise. The only reason we don't have it is lobby influence and
everyone knows it.

[pnwmom]

49. Sanders is specifically supporting Medicare-for-all. Your imaginary single payer plan

that will magically solve the problem of health care costs isn't being proposed by anyone.

[Jefferson23]

51. What is Single Payer?

Single-payer national health insurance, also known as “Medicare for all,” is a system in which a single public or quasi-public agency organizes health care financing, but the delivery of care remains largely in private hands. Under a single-payer system, all residents of the U.S. would be covered for all medically necessary services, including doctor, hospital, preventive, long-term care, mental health, reproductive health care, dental, vision, prescription drug and medical supply costs.

The program would be funded by the savings obtained from replacing today’s inefficient, profit-oriented, multiple insurance payers with a single streamlined, nonprofit, public payer, and by modest new taxes based on ability to pay. Premiums would disappear; 95 percent of all households would save money. Patients would no longer face financial barriers to care such as co-pays and deductibles, and would regain free choice of doctor and hospital. Doctors would regain autonomy over patient care.

The Expanded and Improved Medicare for All Act, H.R. 676, based on PNHP’s JAMA-published Physicians’ Proposal, would establish an American single-payer health insurance system.

http://www.pnhp.org/facts/what-is-single-payer

[pnwmom]

52. You just implied they were different things. So I'll ask again.

Medicare itself isn't containing costs. So how will Medicare for all accomplish that?

[Jefferson23]

55. I didn't imply anything such thing. You keep telling me what will work and what

will not. I already told you the additional problem with a law that
prohibits the government from negotiating prices with the drug
companies. How do you think they got that gem?

You can read the link because I have never heard that a single payer
system will not effectively lower costs while also covering all our citizens.

This is a political problem for us, nothing more, the merits of
single payer are well documented.

[pnwmom]

56. Hillary and Bernie are both against the law that prevents the government

from negotiating prices with drug companies.

But that's not the only health care cost that is rising.

[Jefferson23]

58. That's good if she is, I am not aware she has the same plan to change that.

I support Sanders but that doesn't mean I am confident he will win the
nomination. I want her behind this as policy too because we are vulnerable
with Republicans due to the cost factors.

It is a genuine vulnerability, one they'll hammer away.

[pnwmom]

61. The major obstacle to both their plans is the GOP Congress.

And she's helping to raise money to elect more Dems to Congress. We won't get anything done legislatively without a new legislative body.

[Jefferson23]

62. Of course and why I want them both on board regardless of who wins the nomination.

Skeptics said we'd never get Obamacare..and I for one am glad the
Republicans named it as such..it was a shift the American people
wanted. It will forever be tied to Democrats with that reference
and we now need to make the commitment to do the ground work
to go bring it to a cost effective end.

[mmonk]

38. The Democrats are against universal healthcare.

[Skwmom]

45. B.S. People are FED up with rising health care costs. n/t

[pnwmom]

46. Medicare is struggling with rising costs. How would Medicare for all fix this problem? n/t

[LuvLoogie]

59. In 2009 Bernie was given the chance to

read the American Health Security Act into the record, but he declined. Why? It was less than 200 pages.

Bernie had a chance to read the Single-Payer AHSA into the record in 2009. Instead he voted for the Public Optionless ACA.

I guess when Bernie cops out he really MEANS it. He's a more Genuine, Authentic politician.