You want to support women's health? Support Universal Affordable Health Coverage.

[Armstead]

It really is that simple.

We need a public healthcare system that provides everyone equal access to health care that is affordable for them. We can debate whether that should be single payer or a mixed system. But that's the details.

That would cover women's health issues, and make full coverage available.

Obamacare didn't do it. People are still being squeezed financially, they are still enslaved to the private insurance companies and many still fall through the cracks. And they still have shitty plans with high deductibles and all kinds of otehr protections for the insurance industry and Big Pharma and Corporate for-profit healthcare.

Clinton promises more of the same, with perhaps some tweaks around the edges. But the working mother on a moderate or low income who has to pay far too much for crappy health coverage of all kinds is still being squeezed.

Planned Parenthood's endorsement webpage says that Sanders is 100 percent supportive of their agenda, and has consistently voted with them. They are grateful for his support. But they have decided to throw him to the wolves in the primary because Clinton will "work harder" than Sanders because she is a "champion" of women's health.

https://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/elections-politics/blog/how-do-hillary-clinton-and-bernie-sanders-compare-womens-health/

IMO, if you want to talk about a fighter for women's health care -- along with men's healthcare, it is Sanders. He is the one who has been pushing for years and years for a public system that provides universal coverage. He is so committed to that goal that he can even be a little boring about it.

If Clinton were truly a champion of healthcare for all people, she too would also be standing up to Big Insurance, Big Pharma and the GOP and fighting for true reform, and a public social health insurance system available to everyone.

[JoePhilly]

1. "Clinton promises more of the same ... " yes, actual progress.

If you guys want to run against the ACTUAL progress Obama has made in the last 7+years ... good luck with that.

[SCantiGOP]

4. Thanks,JoePhilly

Excellent point.

[Armstead]

5. It's very small progress and some regressions

Yes it made some actuality progress but also brought setbacks and added more obstacles.

It has further embedded the system's enslavement to private insurers, with the worst aspects of both government bureaucratic complexity and corporate greed. It killed the idea of even a modest public option. It forces people to buy overpriced private insurance -- which is not helping to win over the public to universal public healthcare. And, so far at least, it is allowing continuing consolidation of health insurance industry into de facto publicly mandated corporate monopolies.

[JoePhilly]

7. When I listen to some of Bernie's loudest DU supporters ...

... I am struck by how often, they are the same folks who were totally against the passage of the ACA. As you appear to be now.

They would have preferred NO CHANGE to the getting even the ACA. They attacked the ACA endlessly. Predicted it would fail. That it would help no one. They've even supporters repealing it.

If those people reflect what Bernie would do as President, then I do not want him to win. The ACA, while not perfect, has been extremely successful. If you think nothing was better than the ACA, I can't support you, or your candidate.

btw ... as you complain about the ACA ... know that it is currently saving millions of lives. My niece is one of them. Had cancer at 2, now 20, and she now has full coverage only thanks to the ACA. She's had kidney stones because of the cancer treatment since she was ten. Those were only covered since the ACA passed.

That's REAL progress. And I'm happy Hillary will be working for "more of the same".

[Armstead]

11. No I would have preferred that it be done very differenrly, and I said so at the time

In fact, I think I vaguely remember you and I arguing about it. (Maybe not, perhaps it was another of our perennial arguments. )

I won't get back into all that now.

Suffice it to say, I would have preferred that Obama and the democrats had done it differently. 1)Wait a little while until the dust settled from the Crash and related copntroversies 2) First focused on the few widely popular aspects such as coverage of pre-existing conditions 3) Allowed advocates of universal coverage to participate in the planning 4) Supported and fought for a "public option" as a step to public insurance 5) Actually use salesmanship and aggressive advocacy to build public support by explaining the benefits to the public and push back against the GOP lies. 6) Not worked so hard to placate Corporate insurers, Big Pharma and Republicans and DINOs like Liebermann

[JoePhilly]

15. 1) It took almost a year to get the ACA passed.

2) Those were the focus.

3) the votes for Universal alternatives did not exist.

4) the votes for a PO did not exist.

5) Please. Obama pushed back, even spent an ENTIRE DAY TELEVISED with the GOP debating the ACA.

6) What does that even mean?

Face it ... your candidate, following your plan, would have wasted so much time that NOTHING would have been done. btw ... Lieberman was never going to vote yes, I believe you and I covered that fact years ago. I said he was holding out for a 7 figure think tank jobs ... and where is he now? Exactly where I said he was going.

I want ACTUAL progress. Not wishful thinking.

[Armstead]

18. Progreess is subjective

I remember all the long process and finagling.

Among otehr things, I think if they'd started with smaller bites and worked to build support for a large move in the right direction, incremental if need be, it would have gone a lot better with a better result than this baroque house of cards that we're stuck with.

And Joey did leave, which makes the dominant influence he had on the result evemn more senseless, IMO.

6 means exactly what it says.

[JoePhilly]

20. My neice does not think progress is subjective.

And "Joey" was the 60th vote for ANY bill you think you were going to pass.

[Armstead]

21. I am very glad it helped your neice -- I'd rather see more like her -- and adults -- helped more

I just think among otehr things it was not played well politically. Wouloda, shoulda coulda, I realize, but I would have preferred to have seen things handled differentl;y on many levels.

As I recall, Joe and a couple of others who are long gone were cited as the reason more couldn't get done.

[oasis]

32. "started with smaller bites and worked to build support for a large move in the right

direction, incremental if need be, it would have gone a lot better with a better result..."

What if you applied that same reasoning to a presidential campaign?

[Armstead]

33. It's all about the direction

I have no problem with liberal/progressive moderates, who are moving in the same direction as those who would prefer to see larger and more extensive change to the left.

The problem I have is with "centrists" who often seem to be pushing more in the opposite direction towards conservative/corporate policies and messages.

[CorporatistNation]

24. As Someone Who Manages The Care of Cancer Patients in The Hospital on a Daily Basis...K&R

I can tell you with some authority that The INSURANCE INDUSTRY REMAINS TOTALLY IN CHARGE OF YOUR HEALTH CARE INCLUDING MEDICAL DECISION MAKING! Unless you are a MEDICARE patient... Medicare Advantage plans are SHIT and the people are clueless and often times still believe that they have Medicare AFTER some slick sales person has talked them into signing away their Medicare for PRIVATE Insurance. A lot of the Obamacare plans are just paying a premium for discounts on your bill.

ALL of this SHIT would go bye bye if we had a Medicare for All Plan as an option. It would result in self regulation of the Insurance Industry due to the competitive forces exerted upon them. I advocated for Medicare for All when I ran for Congress. Debbie Wass Schultz fought me tooth and nail as a candidate btw!

The ACA was authored by the INSURANCE INDUSTRY if people will recall.

Causative factor... The Fucking $$$$ in politics which buys the politicians (some more than others), who in turn formulate policy according to the express wishes of their benefactors. ONLY SOLUTION... VOTE BERNIE SANDERS!!!!!!!!!!!

[area51]

30. Thank you,

some people here have trouble dealing with the truth; rightwing, serial killer insurance agencies still control health care in the USA. And medications are insanely unaffordable.

Anyone in their 20s or 30s needs to try to migrate to a first-world country that believes that health care is a basic human right.

I don't see that this nation will ever stop the graft and corruption of congress by the insurance agencies.

[underthematrix]

8. the aggrieved resentment crowd has a lot in common

with Trump supporters. They lack knowledge of the way our government works. I'm not talking about politics here. I'm talking about the actual process of governing, enacting law, and addressing constitutional challenges to policy/practice.

[JoePhilly]

9. Very well said.

The reality is that were Bernie to become President, they'd turn on him minutes after his first compromise with the GOP.

[Armstead]

12. blah, blah, blah...I wish we had your infinite wisdom

[underthematrix]

13. No you don't. You like that fog that surrounds you

[Armstead]

16. Yopu're correct. I'd rather not have your version of fog.

[underthematrix]

17. LOL! I'm definitely not living inside the matrix. That's you in your

fog laden distorted reality.

[Armstead]

19. I don'lt remember using the words matrix in this exchange

I have used it on other occasions because it is a matrix.

And I am not saying the inherent system is a matrix. I'm old enough to remember when it was at least more open to the public interest, and not so enclosed in an elite bubble of wealthy and powerful special interests.

[HerbChestnut]

2. +1 to the OP

Universal healthcare is the only way we can ensure that *everybody* gets the healthcare they need.

[emulatorloo]

3. "throw him to the wolves in the primary"?

I can't make sense of this metaphor. Who are the wolves? Primary voters? The pundits? Corporatists? DU? Twitterverse?

Thanks in advance!

[Armstead]

6. A figure of speech...Throw under the bus better? Make it harder for him?

Insert whatever cliche you prefer that means opposes him and made it harder for him and his supporterss. They said it very nicely, but that's the upshot.

[emulatorloo]

10. Yes, I understand what metaphors are, I just didn't understand yours.

Throw under the bus makes more sense.

Thanks!

That being said, I don't think PP endorsement will have the dire consequences you're predicting.

Current supporters are not going to switch to HRC because of this endorsement.

Additionally, By tomorrow this endorsement will disappear from the news. I don't think it will have as great of an impact as you do.

As to undecideds and soft (persuadable) HRC supporters we just keep highlighting his strong record on women's issues and women's health.

[Armstead]

14. Not dire consequences -- Just another obstacle

It's annoying and not helpful;...But not the end of the world I know.

But the larger issue and point of the OP is still relevant and important beyond this kerfuffle, IMO

[seabeyond]

22. The simplicity is today we have PP. Simplicity is until we have universal, women are dependent on PP

[Armstead]

23. Why not fight to bring Universal Coverage?

Not saying PP doesn't have an important role. Heck they'd have an important role even if we had Universal Coverage.

My point is that it is missing the forest for the trees to advocate for women's health, while allowing an unjust and inefficient system to continue to dominate healthcare.

[seabeyond]

25. "You want to support women's health". You made the statement implying supporting PP doesn't cut it

Today we do not have universal. Today women are depending on PP. Today PP saves women's lives. And today on DU I have listened to too many supposed Dems trash PP.

[Armstead]

26. Why not? PP threw a candidate who supports them under the bus needlessly

I'm among those who are pissed about that.

Planned parenthood had no business making people who both support their organization and support Sanders and OMalley uncomfortable and/or annoyed.

If they want to be political, they should save their fire until the GE and use it against the GOP, instead of stirring up more shit in the primaries.

[seabeyond]

29. I do not play this game. Not one word from me when Sanders gets an endorsement. Women's lives matter

[djean111]

31. Obama fans, I believe, consider anything proposed to replace the ACA as being disloyal to

Obama and his "legacy". Those of us who advocate for single payer are just ingrates. And too bad, so sad for all the millions who still don't have health insurance, or have the insurance, pay the premiums, and can't afford the co-pays and out of pockets.
Meanwhile, premiums and drug prices will continue to go up. It is a blind spot.

[liberal_at_heart]

27. Damn right! My husband has Medicare plus a private insurance policy. When he needs to go

to the doctor he doesn't have to weigh whether or not he can afford to go. He just goes. I on the other hand often put off going to the doctor because I am not on Medicare and we cannot afford the copay for me to go unless it is very necessary or urgent.

[Sunlei]

28. Obamacare insurance is required to cover woman's health care. This does take pressure..

Obamacare coverage for woman's health care does take pressure off 'non-profit'places like Planned Parenthood, as millions of woman today do have Obamacare insurance.

We do need a Gov. non-profit insurance for ALL American citizens.

We could save billions in OUR money- get away from the 'for profits' who take to large a cut of Americas federal & state revenue.