Do you buy into the single payer fantasy of Sanders?

[Prism]

I've been reading around quite a bit. Newspapers, bloggers, DU. And, absent an actual case, I've seen various forms of a strong assertion from Clinton and her supporters. Let's examine the idea being put forth:

"Bernie Sanders thinks if he's elected President, we will have single payer."

Tell me, Sanders fans.

Do you honestly think that will happen? Do you believe this declaration: "If we elect Bernie Sanders, within four to eight years, we will have single payer."

I do not. I do, however, think Sanders will push that as a goal, a political end game. I believe he will tweak and pinch and poke and run around and introduce increments that will begin the transformation of Obamacare towards a single-payer system.

We're constantly told, "Incrementalism is the only way. Sanders falsely promises the moon!" But does he? He's stating an end goal. He's telling us what he wants to work toward. Does anyone honestly think he would not accept even the tiniest compromise bill that shifted Obamacare an inch closer to single payer?

And isn't that the entire point of the Democratic Party? We're not going to get everything. No one can promise us everything. They can only point to the horizon and go, "There. I want us to go there." Sanders does this. Clinton does not. She looks at next year, next two years, next four years, and declares, "Behold all the things we cannot do."

Is there a Sanders supporter in this space who thinks Bernie will pull magical leftists out of his hat? Or do you believe he, too, will be incrementalist, pragmatic, willing, and fighting, but this time in the right direction?

[Fearless]

1. I know if we do nothing then we get nothing.

What did defeatists say about the ACA??

DO TELL... did we get that?

[daleanime]

11. +1

[tecelote]

12. This is it.

"...if we do nothing then we get nothing."

Why is it so hard to understand? We are not moving ahead now, anything is better.

"Yes we can" or "No we can't"

I'll vote for the one telling us that he'll fight for us.

We don't expect miracles.

[BlueMTexpat]

26. No Dem candidate is talking

about doing nothing.

You're talking about GOPers who want to obliterate Obamacare - and anything else that might actually help people.

[tk2kewl]

44. so the not doing nothing dem canidate

Will make sure the gop doesn't completely obliterate the social safety net by bargininng it away a little at a time

bit don't worry, she'll hold the line on taxes and tell wall street to cut it out

[Fearless]

70. ACTUALLY that's exactly what she's saying

That the ACA is good enough. I say it's a start. And we can and must do better.

[BlueMTexpat]

72. She is NOT saying that

the ACA is "good enough." She is saying exactly what you have said: that we can and must do better.

You are only hearing what you want to hear.

[Fearless]

86. She has come out against single payer. ACTUALLY.

[JDPriestly]

2. I lived in Europe and liked the way single payer worked there. It is especially good for

young families, I have to say.

But I agree with you. Single payer is our goal, and it will be reached step by step.

Obamacare is a starting point. I have always believed that.

I am disappointed that Hillary has rejected the idea of single payer rather than agreeing with Bernie that it is the goal.

Rome was not built in a day.

Single payer is the right direction for our country.

We first need to make sure that every man, woman and child in our country is insured. And then we will realize that it is cheaper to do that with single payer and non-profit insurance.

There are a number of different models in Europe for single payer, and we can look at those more carefully than we have, and then find our own way to make sure that health care, affordable health care is available to everyone and that we make it a priority by taking the amounts that the health care cost out of our paychecks as a percentage of our earning, put all that money into one pot and with the money in that pot, insure everyone.

No one should profit from the money we all together put into that pot.

And we should more strongly and effectively encourage healthy lifestyles, which of course, includes trying to find out why we are such a violent society and what we can do about it.

[enid602]

43. SP

Only the UK, Spain and Portugal have SP. All the other European nations have insurance mandated universal healthcare insurance, like the ACA.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

94. I was brought up with the British UK and I miss the NHS

People say why don't you go back there but I say I have work to do here. An NHS would work here.

[Ron Green]

3. The term "single payer" is in common parlance

for the first time because of his candidacy. This in itself is powerful, and shows what can be accomplished by truth and clear speech.

And it's not a fantasy if we want it and work for it.

[highprincipleswork]

4. He never promised anything. Just talking bout things valuable to shoot for. With our help.

The American public has been caught in a toxic garbage dump of propaganda and wrong, negative thinking since the days of Reagan. 9-11 certainly set us back, and the whole country was subjected to full-scale trauma and PTSD. Only recently has the slumbering beast of public opinion picked up its head to roar again, first with Occupy and now with Bernie Sanders.

It's tough to stretch your muscles, have hope again, get yourself heard after such a long time. The beast awakens, in the best sense, like our guardian dragon. It stretches its muscles and its wings.

It is led into battle, for surely there must be a battle when the forces have grown so insidious and so entrenched.

Bernie has not "promised" any of the things he is talking about. He is going for them, however, and thank goodness for that. Plus, he's pointing out the absolute reality that other people all over the world already have much of what we want. American Exceptionalism has let us down in taking care of our most basic human needs and wants. And it didn't used to be this way. It wasn't always this way. There were politicians and policies and philosophies, before the days of Reagan, that knew full well that these Social Services were not only necessary but popular in the most radical way.

Bernie is reminding us of these things, and offering to lead us in the fight to implement them, protect them, and to go even further in lightening the load on the average person in the United States.

At the same time, he insists we have to do this together. No dropping off the followers after election, 50 state strategy all the way, all in this together. In it to win it.

I'd really like to know what is so bad about that? Why wouldn't more people, Progressives especially, like to come along and join this struggle, join this fight?

For me, I know that some people's nervous systems may simply not be ready for this kind of transition into this kind of political action. Some people might feel the need to fight or resist him or resist this struggle or message as much as anything else. But I do encourage them to stretch their arms out, towards these goals and towards each other. It feels good. It is a valiant, righteous struggle and fight. Let it continue, until we win.

[Todays_Illusion]

5. I do and I have wondered for years why the Democratic keep rolling over on the

policies demanded by the conservatives and the wealthiest of our nation.

[EdwardBernays]

6. Three things

1 - Are we such defeatists that we think its not worth trying to insure Healthcare as a right for all citizens?

2 - No one though Obamacare would ever happen.

3 - How well has voting out of fear worked out for America?

[unc70]

7. Would be fun watching him try

He might not make it, but sure would be fun watching him try. And helping him any way I can.

[Hoyt]

8. I buy into that it is probably the best way long-term, but he's not being honest about the cost or

what it takes to get there.

I use "probably" because there are a lot of people in this country who want choice, I believe it will be easier to add a public option to the ACA (while increasing subsidies and reducing out-of-pocket costs) and let people make the choice themselves, I question whether the majority of people are ready to accept the things that will have to be done to control cost and utilization like in other countries, and more.

Then there is the question of the real cost of his plan -- How he goes from $3 Trillion a year to $1.38 Trillion really is a fantasy. To that you have to consider the cost of all the other things he wants to do -- Social Security, education, etc. All these things are laudable, but he's trying to buy votes with promises that he simply can't deliver.

[Omaha Steve]

9. Who voted for war?

What did that cost ALL of us?

OS

[daleanime]

13. +1

[GoneFishin]

29. Yep. You never hear the corporatists or their cheerleaders spreading anti-war messages with

explanations of it being unaffordable.

If the money flows up to billionaires and CEOs then we always have plenty.

But if the money flows down to average Americans -- WHOA! WHOA! TIME-OUT! We can't afford that!

[kristopher]

30. +1

Tell it, Steve!

[freedom fighter jh]

34. Yes, of course people want choice.

There are millions of uninsured and more millions of underinsured who want to have a choice about going to a doctor when they are sick, rather than simply being unable to afford to do so.

Probably, though, you meant a choice among medical plans. I don't think there's anything in Bernie's plan that would forbid doctors from practicing privately, or patients from going to them. That's how they do in Canada.

Perhaps, though, you are thinking that folks can't afford to pay for doctors outside their plans once they are paying so much in tax to support their plan. That will be the case for some. But most will be paying less in tax than they pay now in premiums. (What is your basis for questioning Bernie's numbers? Single payer will have to be less expensive than what we've got now because (1) In countries that that have it, costs are less than ours (while outcomes are better) and (2) the enormous profits of insurance companies will no longer be part of the cost.) If they occasionally need to see a doctor outside their plan, they can probably afford to do so more easily than they can now.

That was, actually, my experience when I switched from Blue Cross to Kaiser. My premiums went down by about 40% and overall I was, and remain, happy with Kaiser's treatment of me, but Kaiser would not cover my chiropractor, who is not on their plan. I found I could go to her all I needed and still save a boatload over what I had been paying Blue Cross. Best of all, when some unexpected health issue came up I could go to Kaiser with absolutely no worry about how to pay for it.

I really don't understand your basis for saying Bernie can't deliver. Surely he cannot deliver everything right away. That's not to say he can't make enormous improvements.

[chervilant]

71. Good to know

you're one of the "No We Can't" crowd. I find it so much more optimistic to support initiatives that We, the vast Hoi Polloi, need and deserve. We're the ones whose industry comprises this nation's GDP, and I think our needs should supersede those of the corporate oligarchy.

(Oh, and, welcome to my IL.)

[mdbl]

10. If Sanders isn't elected, we won't even have the ACA

because Clinton will triangulate away most of it's good points, or a Repug will do away with it all together. The only chance the middle class and below has is Bernie Sanders who, at least will use his veto power to stop all the blabbering moron congressman from doing away with what little is left as I type this. That is what I get from Sanders. If he can pull some magic out of his hat, that would just be a benefit. So, I guess my answer to the OP is no, I don't fantasize that Sanders will get us everything, unless the god of common sense zaps voters in the brain and they have a moment of clarity - now that would be a fantasy come true.

[INdemo]

41. Becasue of her close ties to the Insurance Industry and pharmacuticals

she will triangulate away from it and try to sell to the public "its new and improved" when in fact it will be a "higher profits" for the Insurance Companies"

Let just hope she doesn't have that chance to make that payback to the Insurance Compainies..her enemy remember?

[tecelote]

14. So many other countries can do it.

What do you think is wrong with America that we can't?

[Stevepol]

15. Yep! I'm a sucker for a good deal. I plead guilty.

I also am sometimes swayed by facts.

[Android3.14]

16. I dunno. Do you buy into the cowardly doublespeak of his detractors?

meh.

[bowens43]

17. No one believes it will be easy or happen over night

but unlike hillary, Bernie will fight for what is right.

'Can't' is not in Bernie's vocabulary,

'No we can't' is hillarys motto......

[Helen Borg]

18. It's funny... With regard to women's right to vote, not too long ago...

Hillary's argument then would have been: Fellow women, how can you possibly get the right to vote? You could only get that by voting! But you cannot vote. So, it's a pie in the sky fantasy. Hillary is a status quo promoter because it benefits her and her family.

[Half-Century Man]

19. If we get progressives in on his coat tails.......

It will take some time. The more of US that woek toward it, the faster it happens.

[wtawilltaw]

20. Oh boy

Old DU member here but constant reader. As the primaries have been heating up this forum has annoyed the hell out of me. The majority of Democrats, Liberals were pushing for some form of single payer. The now president ran exclusively on giving the public an option. For all you so called Democrats that are calling Sanders ideas fantasy or pie in the sky principle what is wrong with you seriously?

It's no wonder why businesses are usually Republican supporters because all these water knee Democrats fail negotiation 101. If you want to sell a house for a million you start at +$1.5 not $1 million. Barak at every turn negotiated from the right. He in a way started the price at $750k. This is what it sounds like on this forum.

The political system took a hard shift to the right incrementalism wont work. Democrats need heavy movers and shakers not feathers.

[MichMan]

33. Not the way it works

If you want to sell a house for a million you start at +$1.5 not $1 million. Barak at every turn negotiated from the right. He in a way started the price at $750k. This is what it sounds like on this forum.


Actually you don't. Talk to people who sell real estate for a living. If something is way too unrealistically priced, people just walk on by without even submitting an offer. Real estate 101

[wtawilltaw]

59. You dont start at zero and expect to go up..

Common sense 101. The one thing that irritated me the most about Obama was they never even put the public option for vote. They just said it couldnt be done. Just like the weak left in this forum. It's why I went independent a long time ago. What I see is politicians playing good cop bad cop but all working for the same corporate interest.

[corkhead]

21. who is putting forth "Bernie Sanders thinks if he's elected President, we will have single payer." ?

[liberal N proud]

22. If you are living in Fantasy Land - maybe

But we live in Reality where such things, however much we want them just will not happen regardless of who in President. Obama would have chosen single payer, but he had to rely on Congress to write the laws and they turned it over to the insurance companies to do the job.

Who in their right mind thinks that one person can change that dynamic?

Might as well go

[pnwmom]

23. It matters what the General Election voter believes. Bernie's put his plan out there,

with its basically indefensible numbers. So what happens when he goes into the debates, against someone like Ted Cruz, for example?

How does he explain that he only meant it as a goal, not for real? That no one should expect it to work out "within four to eight years"?

If he hadn't put out a detailed plan, with numbers, that might make sense. But he has, and the plan doesn't work. And even if you believed it, his projected cost is $14 trillion dollars. So how will he defend it?

[Vinca]

24. As I recall, this was a fantasy most often seen in 2008.

I can't remember one person on this site saying, "Nah . . . I'd rather keep my private insurance." The notion by Hillary Clinton supporters that we should have our heads checked rather than try to make things better is offensive. Maybe it won't work. Maybe it will but it will take a long time. Maybe we should continue to say "Yes We Can" rather than "No We Can't."

[BlueMTexpat]

27. No Hillary supporter has

EVER said that we should not try to make things better.

[Vinca]

32. Hillary supporters are, almost to a person, running opposed to single-payer.

Big insurance is currently reaping record profits because of the ACA, but at the same time they're raising premiums. A public option would make things better, but just adding more people to the billion dollar profits of big insurance won't. The bottom line is if Hillary suddenly came out and said, "I'm for single-payer, too," there would be a change in opinion here that would be like a fast U-turn on a busy highway. I wish all of the people who supported single-payer in 2008 would be more honest now. It's not necessary to endorse 100% of what your chosen candidate proposes. You can still be for Hillary and support single-payer. I honestly don't know why I keep beating this drum since I've already got mine. I'm on Medicare and happy as a clam.

[BlueMTexpat]

40. That is much different from saying,

as you did, that they do not want to do anything.

The ultimate ideal, IMO, is indeed single payer. I am a Hillary supporter and, yes, I say that.

But I am enough of a realist to know that the USA was not able to enact single payer in the immediate post-WWII years - when liberal ideas and Keynesian economics were the fashion (e.g., the UK's NHS and France's healthcare system, which built on earlier ideals of the French Revolution). It also took until 1966 in a comparatively progressive political environment even to enact Medicare - after bitter opposition. Today's environment is simply not anywhere near as progressive and, sadly, that is the truth.

So when any candidate - especially one who so far has had very little support in endorsements from Dem lawmakers in Congress - proposes to implement "single payer" and omits a lot of necessary details about how that will happen, I see that very much as a fantasy. No President can implement anything without strong support. Even if our President has overwhelming Dem support, Dems are still not a majority in Congress and thus cannot enact anything by themselves.

I simply do not believe that GOPers in Congress will suddenly turn into progressives overnight because Bernie - or ANY Dem candidate - has made them see the light. Look at what ALL their candidates are saying.

Hell, GOPers oppose Obamacare with every breath they take and Obamacare basically follows what they themselves wanted some years back.

[mikehiggins]

50. Just to discuss one point

"But I am enough of a realist to know that the USA was not able to enact single payer in the immediate post-WWII years - when liberal ideas and Keynesian economics were the fashion (e.g., the UK's NHS and France's healthcare system, which built on earlier ideals of the French Revolution). It also took until 1966 in a comparatively progressive political environment even to enact Medicare - after bitter opposition. Today's environment is simply not anywhere near as progressive and, sadly, that is the truth."

After WWII the liberal ideas you discuss were not unopposed, although the people behind that opposition were ignored by the press and the government. People like the Prescott Bush's and the like were very much involved in the corridors of power (he was one of the folks who was reportedly involved in an abortive military coup intended to overthrow FDR) but the reality of the wealthy among us fighting to undo all the things that benefited us was ignored or discounted by a population consumed with defending ourselves against the Godless Commies. It was a masterful con job and gave rise to lots of bad things, one of which was the idea that the people can't do anything about anything because, after all, doing anything about anything would involve change, and change just can't be done unless you're a Godless Commie.

The Right, in Europe, was offset by virulent opposition from the Left, up to and including rioting in the streets. In the US that was not the case. The difference was that the Right, in the US, is incredibly wealthy and able to shape the public discourse by simply buying off the opposition. The Left concerned itself with arguing over who was the most pure, much like the Leninist v Trotskyite Tag Team match among the Godless Commies. The Right, aka the rich establishment, was very proficient at turning one group against the other, sort of like triangulation, so that even the most well meaning on the Left were marginalised, blacklisted, ostracised.

In Europe, the Right constantly had to deal with the historical reality of the iconic guillotine, a symbol of where too great an imbalance could lead. We don't have things like that here, but we do have politicians who are ready and willing to be bought off, and a mass media that is largely made up of quislings subservient to the powers that be.

My point is that the opposition to progressives is not some sort of inherent, organic part of the US society. It is a product being purchased by the very wealthy, and sold by those to whom thirty pieces of silver is a perfectly fine payoff.

The list of things accomplished despite that is long and obvious, even as people decry the possibility of change. It is a fact that many who fought for change, like MLK, jr, and Bobby Kennedy fell by the wayside but the issues they supported were addressed far more fully than those on the "inside" thought could happen.

Reforming the government so the people get a fair shake is possible, but not if the slogan that wins the day is "no, we can't."

[wildeyed]

78. Are you kidding?

Who said anything about not making it better? We just disagree on the mechanics of the process. What is offensive is people who are unable to have a reasonable discussion about healthcare policy without accusing the other of mental illness. On both sides. People can disagree and NOT be mental defective in some way. Or evil. Or greedy.

I am self-employed in a red state. Nobody gets screwed harder on health insurance premiums than I do, trust me on that.

Yes we can make it better, but only if progressives learn to show up for mid-term elections and take some responsibility for activism, stop expecting a white night or politician to ride in to save them

[Vinca]

89. Calm down. I don't think I've ever called anyone on this site a mental defective.

All I'm saying is that we should have high aspirations and I don't appreciate the constant bashing of Bernie supporters who are still in favor of what everyone on this site was in favor of in 2008.

[wildeyed]

90. Asking for a workable budget on single-payer

before trashing ACA is not 'bashing'.

[Vinca]

93. "Trashing" ACA hasn't been proposed.

Bernie has said numerous times he would do nothing to jeopardize anyone's healthcare. What did you expect? He'd be sworn in, end the ACA and then expect a Republican House to go along with single-payer? The point is you can't stop trying. No more "No We Can't." And his budget for this has been posted in this forum more than once before.

[OkSustainAg]

25. The math will work.

If you take how much people pay in average premium multiply by a number of insured and times it by 10 years you get a number that is far greater than the cost in taxes for a single payer. You can tax. Stop being afraid of it. Corporations need to be taxed at a greater level. With taxes we buy civilization. If we are not going to do that. Than they need to pay considerably more in wages. The wealthy and corporations are not going to get out of paying one way or the other. We start with electing Bernie and begin to support progressive candidates down ticket and support and fund them the same way we do Bernie. Thats what movements are. Not elect one person and its fixed.

[MrMickeysMom]

28. THIS^^^

Math works wonderfully.

So does bar charts. Look at the proportion of the budgets and then total numbers devoted to the budget, find the sources of revenue, and where that goes when you allow corporations to not pay their fair share.

It works every time!

Welcome to DU

[OkSustainAg]

37. Stop over inflating the military

Stop fighting unnecessary wars. Make the federal budget bigger and stop caving to right wing Ideology. I'm not against larger government. I want my country to work for the citizens.

[wildeyed]

79. Where?

What are you even talking about? Link please.

[Gothmog]

49. The Bernie Sanders Health Plan Is Too Good To Be True, Analyst Says

These savings are simply not true http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sanders-health-plan-cost_us_56a8ff99e4b0f6b7d5447ee8?section=politics

According to analysis from Emory University professor Kenneth Thorpe, a former Clinton administration advisor who has also done paid work for health industry clients, Sanders has wildly underestimated the cost of providing such comprehensive benefits to all Americans. Either his plan would blow a giant hole in the deficit, Thorpe predicts, or the new payroll and income taxes to finance the proposal would be more than twice as high as the Sanders campaign has projected.

Either way, Thorpe says, the Sanders plan would create both winners and losers, as any health reform proposal would. The winners would include workers for whom the new taxes would still be less than what they pay now, in premiums and out-of-pocket costs combined. The losers would include some Medicaid recipients with jobs, because their employers would pass along the expense of new payroll taxes as lower wages.

[OkSustainAg]

58. Let's give single payer a try.

we let righties and corporations have thier shot at nation building to utter failure and cost.
Let something new rebuild our nation and history will be on our side.

[Gothmog]

69. Why single payer died in Vermont

If single payer can not work in Vermont, then there is no chance that it will be adopted in the entire country http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/single-payer-vermont-113711#ixzz3xciq2Nj5

So single-payer advocates looked instead to make a breakthrough in the states. Bills have been introduced from Hawaii to New York; former Medicare chief Don Berwick made it a key plank of his unsuccessful primary race for Massachusetts governor.

Vermont under Shumlin became the most visible trailblazer. Until Wednesday, when the governor admitted what critics had said all along: He couldn’t pay for it.

“It is not the right time for Vermont” to pass a single-payer system, Shumlin acknowledged in a public statement ending his signature initiative. He concluded the 11.5 percent payroll assessments on businesses and sliding premiums up to 9.5 percent of individuals’ income “might hurt our economy.”

Vermont’s outcome is a “small speed bump,” said New York Assembly member Richard Gottfried, who’s been pushing single-payer bills for more than 20 years. But opponents says it’s the end of the road.

“If cobalt blue Vermont couldn’t find a way to make single-payer happen, then it’s very unlikely that any other state will,” said Jack Mozloom, spokesman for the National Federation of Independent Business.

“There will never be a good time for a massive tax increase on employers and consumers in Vermont, so they should abandon that silly idea now and get serious,” Mozloom added.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/single-payer-vermont-113711#ixzz3xdKH1mGn

Sanders is proposing a skeleton of a plan (not a real plan at all) that has no chance of passage. The refusal of Sanders to answer the question was an admission that even Sanders knows that this plan is not real.

[wildeyed]

80. I totally read this as

"Let's give prayer a try" the first time I scanned it.

But same dif, really. Because your post is about as detailed and common sense as doing that other thing. You gonna tame the Pentagon and impose single-payer on a populace that doesn't even want it for the most part? Hmmm.... You know that currently, we can't even AUDIT the Pentagon? Don't even know where the hell the money is going, but you and Bernie Sanders gonna make them fly straight

Better yet, tell me what you are actually doing to bring this new age to fruition, other than posting drivel on the DU? You gotta actual ground plan for this revolution? Build a coalition of like minded organizations? Win hearts and minds of your opposition? Did you register the voters? Give them five door knock and/or calls to be certain they show up to vote? That's what it takes. Do it again the next year? It's hard work, better get up early and get started.

[OkSustainAg]

95. Yes, I do.

I Have found the way to grow, recycle and create 70% of what I do. With little or no money. I am completely recession proof.
I have 0 debt. I have been showing those in my area how to do this. The 1.5% top of the ladder can be taxed on they are against it and have no defense against why we shouldn't do it. The way to win this is by the rest of us to join together and stop buying in to their crap. Why does our government need to be small. I not a republican. The government could write a check right now to every one in this country and the benefits would run through the local economies and we would benefit more than the cost of the wars that would return us nothing. Tax them now! Take the redistribution that was given to them and redistribute to the people.

[Locrian]

31. when can we start calling buying into > $1 trillion for wars a "fantasy" ?? - n/t

[Duckhunter935]

35. I believe in single payer

And it is not a fantasy. Too bad some like what we have and do not even want to try.

[yodermon]

36. Negotiate from a position of STRENGTH. Bernie knows this.

Campaign on single payer, maybe we Get a public option.
(he can't say this yet though without weakening his position).

What's Hillary campaigning on? Stats quo? How inspiring.

[bklyncowgirl]

38. Yes, I do think that adopting a single payer system would be the best thing for this country.

Do I think it will be easy? No.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

39. No magic wands here.

But if you start from the assumption that you have a goal, you'll never get to that goal.

We keep seeing the Overton window move right. It's time to start moving it left again.

Sanders has already done more to reform the word 'socialism' with his run than anything since the McCarthy era, even though he's just a tiny bit more socialist than any Dem out there. Shift the public's view on single payer enough, and we might get a Congress that might at least do a public option, or a lower medicare enrollment age in the next 8 years. We certainly won't if we never even try for more.

[LWolf]

42. No.

I'm a longtime supporter of single-payer health care, and I'm glad that Sanders is behind it. I am a supporter of HR 676, the Conyers/Kucinich bill, along with many others, including many physicians. It's not a fantasy.


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

[HERVEPA]

45. Be careful. You're horning into Dan's territory. You guys need to coordinate.

[vi5]

46. If you get a chance, can you let me know....

..what other long time progressive goals we should just give up on from the start? Or should I just assume that it's all of them and that what we have right now is the base line, and that we need to just be happy with things not getting worse. Because honestly that seems to be the entire theme of Clinton supporters at this point and something I've never seen or heard from any candidate or their supporters in my 30+ years as a registered Democrat.

[Gothmog]

47. The Sanders plan depends on hypothetical costs savings that Prof. Krugman thinks are false

The Sanders plan depends on massive cost savings that have no basis in reality. The GOP keep on promising massive economic growth due to tax cuts and this growth has yet to show up. Prof. Krugman compares Sanders hoped for health care savings to the GOP tax cuts. I trust Prof. Krugman on this http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/19/weakened-at-bernies/?_r=0

On health care: leave on one side the virtual impossibility of achieving single-payer. Beyond the politics, the Sanders “plan” isn’t just lacking in detail; as Ezra Klein notes, it both promises more comprehensive coverage than Medicare or for that matter single-payer systems in other countries, and assumes huge cost savings that are at best unlikely given that kind of generosity. This lets Sanders claim that he could make it work with much lower middle-class taxes than would probably be needed in practice.

To be harsh but accurate: the Sanders health plan looks a little bit like a standard Republican tax-cut plan, which relies on fantasies about huge supply-side effects to make the numbers supposedly add up. Only a little bit: after all, this is a plan seeking to provide health care, not lavish windfalls on the rich — and single-payer really does save money, whereas there’s no evidence that tax cuts deliver growth. Still, it’s not the kind of brave truth-telling the Sanders campaign pitch might have led you to expect.

Again, as noted by Prof. Krugman this plan does not add up.

[Gothmog]

48. Bernie Sanders's fiction-filled campaign

This is a great editorial from the Washington Post that discusses the claimed savings in Sanders health care plan https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/bernie-sanderss-fiction-filled-campaign/2016/01/27/cd1b2866-c478-11e5-9693-933a4d31bcc8_story.html

Mr. Sanders’s story continues with fantastical claims about how he would make the European social model work in the United States. He admits that he would have to raise taxes on the middle class in order to pay for his universal, Medicare-for-all health-care plan, and he promises massive savings on health-care costs that would translate into generous benefits for ordinary people, putting them well ahead, on net. But he does not adequately explain where those massive savings would come from. Getting rid of corporate advertising and overhead would only yield so much. Savings would also have to come from slashing payments to doctors and hospitals and denying benefits that people want.

He would be a braver truth-teller if he explained how he would go about rationing health care like European countries do. His program would be more grounded in reality if he addressed the fact of chronic slow growth in Europe and explained how he would update the 20th-century model of social democracy to accomplish its goals more efficiently. Instead, he promises large benefits and few drawbacks.

Meanwhile, when asked how Mr. Sanders would tackle future deficits, as he would already be raising taxes for health-care expansion and the rest of his program, his advisers claimed that more government spending “will result in higher growth, which will improve our fiscal situation.” This resembles Republican arguments that tax cuts will juice the economy and pay for themselves — and is equally fanciful.

The Washington Post is agreeing with Prof. Krugman's analysis

[Zen Democrat]

53. It's not a fantasy for the rest of the civilized world!

[hrmjustin]

51. Singld payer is a great goal.

I just think we will get it in the next 5 to 10 years.

[Zen Democrat]

52. Bernie is out to bring in a revolution from the White House to the House of Reps and Senate.

Just like Reagan did from the right (and no one thought it possible at the time), Bernie can be the catalyst to reversing the status quo from the American political system. Anything else is business as usual.

Thank BIG! And WORK HARD.

[gyroscope]

54. Do you honestly think Clinton will lift a finger

to try to improve the ACA to benefit ordinary Americans?

taking large sums of money from big pharma and insurance lobbyists, tells me she will not.

[CharlotteVale]

61. +1

[Sunlei]

55. I love the way Senator Sanders reaches for the entire pie, Obama should have done that too.

If he did perhaps persons aged 50/55plus would have had non-profit Gov. medicare today.

[gordyfl]

56. Why would politicians oppose Medicare for All? Money.

Single-payer is a complete government-run health insurance system under which everyone is covered, e.g., Canada’s system.

The "public option" is a single federal insurance plan that would compete with private insurance companies.

Why would members of Congress (and Hillary) oppose either plan? The answer is simple -- Money.

From 2009...

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2009/09/committee-members-opposed-to-p/

[Jefferson23]

57. Sanders main platform is defeating special interrest monies that BLOCK to their

benefit the policies allegedly all Democrats are on board with. Taxes, Bank regulations, Single Payer
and a host of other issues.

That is what his political revolution is about, period. His message hasn't changed,
those portraying him as dishonest about the challenges involved that HE made
clear long ago are either lying and or dumb. Who is committed to these efforts,
evidently not Clinton. Who is taking lobby money, not Bernie.

It's about having a functioning democracy.

[amborin]

60. Bernie will fight for it, but an "incrementalist" will cave to the Insurance Ind and Big Pharma

[TheBlackAdder]

62. It's so nice to read an equally weighted OP, one that does not prejudge or load the question. nt

[Autumn]

63. The ACA was sold as a stepping stone, the fear that Benrie will undo Obamas "greatest"

achievement is stupid. Hillary will keep the ACA because insurance companies benefit her, not because Obama... I believe Bernie will be an incrementalist, pragmatic, willing, and fighting President for the people, and yes this time in the right direction.

[Nanjeanne]

64. I do and it's no fantasy

Because Bernie was brave enough to,put out a plan with details unlike Clinton and he is being scrutinized like crazy. The vision is correct and it works in every other industrialized country better than what we have here. So I'm willing to admit that there will need to be tweaks in the plan and I'm fine with that. But it's a fact that other countries do this and cover all their people, have better outcomes and cost less. I'm sure we can do better as well if we TRY. All other countries whether public or private insurance based, make it illegal to make a profit on basic healthcare. And please do not bring up Netherlands. They, along with Switzerland do have private health insurance systems but they are non- profit. They only make profit on the add on services.

I will gladly pay additional tax to have actual health CARE. I do not want to continue paying thousands of dollars for health insurance.

So YES I can't wait until there is discussion again about real answers to our health care problem. As soon as we start electing brave people who are willing to stand up to the insurance lobby.

[Zorra]

65. If Bernie is elected single payer will inevitably follow.

As inevitably as same sex marriage became law.

Everyone despises the criminal corporations that either cheat us or try to cheat us any and every time that they can.

We will stop this insane Healthcare Casino insanity if we can manage to elect someone like Bernie who will support our democratic wishes.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

66. fantasy? - stupid question - the question should be

why not? the rest of the world can do it.

[wildeyed]

74. Is this a rhetorical question,

or are you really interesting in understanding? There are unique historical, cultural and geographical reasons that make this much more difficult in the US than in many other countries. I can explain more, but I don't want to type a bunch if you are just blowing smoke.

[AgingAmerican]

67. Defeatism

The calling card of the Clinton campaign.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

68. Hopefully, we'll find out with Bernie. With Hillary we already know we won't.

[wildeyed]

73. Nah. All you need is a politician

who is willing to walk through that door once the activists push it open far enough. That's the easy part. You gotta make them do it. That's the hard part.

Activist are responsible for giving the politician the cover they need to get the work of the legislation done. King famously pushed Kennedy and LBJ on civil rights. The depression opened the door for FDR. None of that groundbreaking legislation gets done without both timing and the right activists in place to agitate on the issues.

Sanders math on single-payer doesn't work. His job is to present a workable policy that we can move toward. He has not done that.

"And isn't that the entire point of the Democratic Party?"
NO. That is not the point of a political party at all. They are a tactic to allow politicians to win elections. Nothing more.

Y'all should quit dumping your responsibility to agitate the shit out of this issue onto Sanders or a political party's lap in the first place. Because it goes nowhere if you do that. MAKE THEM DO IT. Show up at every board meeting, at the state house and vote in every single election that you are eligible for. Write OpEds and register voters. Make the local pols who oppose you fucking miserable every time they see you coming until they pass your law just to get you off their back. Yes you can!

[H2O Man]

75. Please stop.

[Trajan]

76. How rude ...

We are DONE with the DLC ... No more ...

The Clinton's can take their billions and billions with them back to the Hamptons ...

And the Clinton supporters ? .. I guess I never really knew how hideously awful you can be ...

I would never want to be in a party with the right wingy Clinton people who have occupied the Democratic Party since the DLC was formed ...

We return to caring about PEOPLE, or fuck them ... I won't belong to a conservative party ..

No fucking way ... No fucking how ...

Btw - your rudeness warrants removal from my DU feed ... It's well deserved ....

[wildeyed]

81. We return to caring about PEOPLE, or fuck them?

What does that even mean? Am I supposed to be impressed with your deep compassion for all living beings now? You know, yelling about how 'hideously awful' other posters are might be a sign that the problem lies elsewhere....

And guess what, I am a Clinton supporter but never was into the DLC (doesn't exist anymore, BTW). Dean supporter here (also a Clinton supporter!), and activist trained at Camp Wellstone. I would bet lots of money that I can out-liberal you on at least three out of four metrics too

[Trajan]

83. Gone

I am not alone in believing the Democratic Party has abandoned the middle and lower classes ....

You? ... Simply gone ...

[wildeyed]

85. Gone.

I am not even a member of the Democratic Party. I am an ACTIVIST. I DO SHIT. For PEOPLE. Don't even believe in politicians, really and barely listen to anything they say. Just words. Words are cheap. People who think they actually mean what they say, any of them, are either naive or deluded IMO. They exist to do the political thing. I exist to force them to do it right.

You exist? Why? To yell at people who do shit that they are doing it wrong? I'm out....

[Trajan]

77. Hah ... 'The Right Direction'

You said it .. Just like Hillary - in 'the right direction'

Tata ...

[Nanjeanne]

82. Vermont is a small state

With a small tax base which is why single payer should be a federal government program as Medicare is. Nothing nefarious or a reason to not put together a si glee payer system for the United States.

[senz]

84. I trust Bernie to do everything he can to steer us in the right direction.

He is the only candidate I trust to do that.

This, along with his honesty, judgment, and lengthy, honorable experience in Washington D.C., is reason to elect him to the presidency.

[Blue_In_AK]

87. It may take longer than that,

but the point is to continue moving forward, not be satisfied with the ACA, which is deeply flawed. I would think the next step would be to provide a public option and from there move on to single payer.

Related to this - my state now has ONE insurance provider. How nice for those of you in the L 48 who can "shop around." http://www.adn.com/article/20160128/alaska-kicks-moda-health-out-individual-insurance-market

[Betty Karlson]

88. Yes, it will happen. It is only sensible.

Of course, there are those who'd prefer to try all other (non-realistic) approaches first, like Clinton, but eventually even she will have to admit that Sanders had a good idea.

The status quo is untenable - and anyone can see that who isn't stuck in a 20th century mindset.

Sanders and his supporters will change the socio-economic-political infrastructure of this land - and that way we can start to build the nation we deserve rather than the one we are burdened with.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

91. "A man's reach should exceed his grasp, or what's a heaven for?"

--- Browning

[Ferd Berfel]

92. ‘Single-payer is the only health reform that pays for itself’

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2016/january/doctors-group-welcomes-national-debate-on-%E2%80%98medicare-for-all%E2%80%99

Physicians for a National Health Program, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization of 20,000 doctors who support single-payer national health insurance, released the following statement today by its president, Dr. Robert Zarr, a Washington, D.C., pediatrician.

Nonpartisan physicians group calls single-payer reform ‘the only effective remedy’ for nation’s continuing health care woes and urges focus on facts, not rhetoric
--------------------------------

No,we can't - and No we won't even Try are unacceptable from any American, but especially from any Democrat

[treestar]

96. The same people who are claiming Obama didn't get it

usually blame him in such a way that I don't see how it would be less than a double standard if they let Bernie get credit for just an incremental move toward it.