Heidi Heitkamp: Democrats, don't ditch the ACA for Medicare-for-all

[Skya Rhen]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/heidi-heitkamp-democrats-dont-ditch-the-aca-for-medicare-for-all/2019/05/08/b77780cc-71a9-11e9-9f06-5fc2ee80027a_story.html?utm_term=.b728df938431


Heidi is basically saying that the Democrats should put the Republican party on the defense as to what they have to offer by way of a replacement for the ACA, since they have asked the Courts to eliminate the ACA completely (including protection for pre-existing conditions).

Putting forth the MFA puts the Democrats on the defensive and gives the Republicans an opportunity to attack it without being forced to offer their own solutions for replacing the heath care that they are determined to take away from us.

[shanny]

1. Any reason why we should listen to a Democrat

who lost her re-election campaign?

[Skya Rhen]

3. Perhaps she was not moderate enough...

[shanny]

4. lol

or perhaps her instincts are not as good as she thinks

[Cha]

23. Maybe you're just trying to insult her.

[TwilightZone]

26. Or perhaps you know nothing about North Dakota's political demographics.

[wellst0nev0ter]

62. Pukes barred Native Americans from voting

but yeah, blame the Democrat.

[Submariner]

7. Prove it to me she legitimately lost her campaign

Trump and that racist hillbilly cracker McConnell are election stealing treason weasels whose stateside conspirators and Russian partners in crime rigged voting machines and vote tallying computers.

She didn't lose as much as she had it stolen from her. The white trash governor excluded Native Americans from voting because of Post Office bullshit.

We're only in the non-shooting phase of Civil War 2 at the moment. It's going to get worse.

[shanny]

12. um OK--I'll give it a shot

Heitkamp had a surprise win in 2012 with 161,337 votes, a margin of fewer than 3000 votes. A presidential year, with Obama on the ballot btw.

In 2016 the state went for tRump by a margin of 36%.

In 2018, the bullshit ID law aimed at Native Americans was largely a bust: while some 5000 votes were endangered (according to estimates prior to election day) only a few dozen were actually lost, due to a lot of hard work.
https://www.wtoc.com/2018/11/08/few-native-american-voters-had-id-issues-north-dakota/

Nevertheless, Heitkamp lost the election by a margin of 35,000 votes (approx 17,000 fewer than she had in 2012).

All that being said, I agree with your assessments of tRump, the racist hillbilly cracker McConnell and the white trash governor of ND. I just don't think being "moderate" is the way to address the issue (Heitkamp, btw, voted with tRump 54% of the time, according to 538)

To quote Harry S Truman:
"The people don't want a phony Democrat. If it's a choice between a genuine Republican, and a Republican in Democratic clothing, the people will choose the genuine article, every time...."

[dsc]

13. actually her stance against the Kavenaugh nomination likely is what sunk her

some times it is worth losing an election.

[shanny]

15. I'm sure it didn't help

but she was the most-endangered D Senator even before that.

That said, some votes are worth losing an election over.

[Cha]

22. In North Dakota.. I knew there

would be something about Heitkamp "losing".. and here it is

[Cha]

28. Progressives Support Shoring Up ACA Before Tackling Medicare For All

Ocasio-Cortez said she understood prioritizing fixes to the Affordable Care Act. “Because we have a Republican Senate, a Republican president, and so the things that we have the ability to pass right now are pretty narrow,” she said, though she added she wanted hearings on Medicare for All and didn’t think single-payer solutions had been given enough attention from the Democratic caucus yet.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142293852#top

[pandr32]

55. I agree

Aloha, Cha!

[Cha]

56. Aloha, pandr!

[LakeArenal]

57. 👍🏻

[Blue_true]

38. She lost due to republicans eliminating a lot of Indian reservation vote.

She is absolutely RIGHT. If we let republicans off the defensive by us going after something that is highly unlikely to even get a hearing from McConnell, Mitch McConnell is just going to use it to demagogue democrats. Why not stay with improving something that Americans are increasingly liking and forcing republicans to self-destruct trying to attack it?

[Celerity]

42. That appears to not be factual, see post 12

[Blue_true]

60. The poster proved no numbers on reservation posdible votes

versus how many were lost to voter intimidation. The poster seemed to have been concerned with pushing the narrative that Heitkamp should not be listened to because she disagrees with Bernie on Medicare for All.

[Fresh_Start]

47. Probably more reason to listen to her to to listen to anyone on DU

if you are deciding based on the fact that she lost reelection after being elected to begin with.

Why would we want to listen to anyone who was never elected?
Why would we want to listen to someone who ran for higher office and lost the primary?

Maybe the goal isn't to look at who is talking but instead to look at what is being discussed...

[HopeAgain]

2. Timidity has served so well...

[area51]

5. +1

We desperately need comprehensive Medicare for All. Please contact your rep and Speaker Pelosi to support it.

[brooklynite]

6. I'm sure Bernie Sanders will be a hit in South Dakota.

[NurseJackie]

8. Ooph!

[Skya Rhen]

9. There, as well as in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Ohio...

[shanny]

16. Oh you mean the states where tRump

ran to Hillary's left...and won?

[TwilightZone]

30. Hillary ran on the most progressive platform of a major presidential candidate in history.

Your revisionist history is showing.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/11/06/hillary-clinton-strikingly-progressive-campaign/puJGrd0DEK7ktpvi1Yf0SN/story.html

[Demsrule86]

45. Nonsense, Trump ran on a manufacturing improvement theme...A leftist

won't win those states. MFA is going to be demonized. Biden is running on a public option which works with a revamped ACA.

[Celerity]

65. We are, unfortunately, (I am am very happy to see Biden support it) going to have a hell of a hard

time even getting a public option pushed through, let alone the 'never going to happen for decades' medicare for all pipe dream. The institutional power players are staunchly against even the slightest diminution of their extractive abilities within the for-profit health care matrix.

As Dems debate Medicare for All, a less radical idea stalls in blue states

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/08/health-care-blue-states-1308730

This was supposed to be the year blue states created government-run health insurance plans, after health care-fueled midterm election victories.

But legislation around the country to craft a so-called public option — a longtime progressive goal — has stalled over political and financial roadblocks, underscoring the challenge of creating coverage expansions even less comprehensive than the "Medicare for All" plan championed by Democratic presidential contenders and progressives in Congress.

Legislative proposals in New Mexico, Nevada and other states to set up a public option to give people more choices — and insurers more competition — have been watered down or shelved as lawmakers struggle to design affordable plans building on Obamacare. And multiple Democratic governors who backed the idea during their campaigns haven’t pushed it since taking office.

“When you’re dealing with a new issue — and this is a new idea — the biggest problem around the idea is one of cost," said former Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear, a Democrat. "Where is the money going to come from? And obviously every politician is concerned about that, rightfully so."

The public option has appeal among some moderate Democratic officials hoping to harness the base’s energetic support for Medicare for All in the 2020 elections — while skirting the political risk of embracing the full single-payer overhaul that Republicans decry as socialism. Democrats who have embraced less radical overhauls hoped to leverage the party’s newfound advantage on health care to make progress toward universal coverage this year while contrasting it with Republican efforts to repeal Obamacare.

snip

There already are troubling signs that the 2009 tactics (where the public option was taken off the table due to immense pressure from the lobbyists) are being baked in the cake yet again.

At Biden's first major campaign fundraiser, in Philadelphia a few weeks back, one of the co-hosts was Daniel Hilferty.

Daniel Hilferty is the CEO of Independence Blue Cross. He is on the board of America’s Health Insurance Plans, the trade association working to defeat the progressive push for Medicare for All. In national politics, Hilftery has exclusively donated to Republicans this year, records show. The health insurance executive gave $5,000 to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., along with smaller donations to other congressional Republicans (see below).

https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/individual-contributions/?two_year_transaction_period=2020&contributor_name=Hilferty%2C+Daniel+&min_date=01%2F01%2F2019&max_date=12%2F31%2F2020





Hilferty's group America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), pumped in $102 million in 14 months to try and block Obamacare, now they are doing the same with MFA and even the much milder buy-in option.


Health Care Insurers Spent $100 Million To Defeat Obamacare


https://www.democraticunderground.com/1002805314

As the Supreme Court readies to announce their decision on the individual mandate portion of the health reform, it has emerged that the largest health care lobbying group in the country spent a total of $102.4 million in just 15 months to prevent Obamacare from becoming law in the first place.

In 2009 alone, America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP) pumped $86.2 million into a conservative lobbying group, the US Chamber of Commerce, to combat President Obama’s health care reform plan. But with the added months of 2010 prior to the ACA’s March passage, AHIP piled on an additional $16 million to be used against the bill.

That staggering total, which the National Journal’s Influence Alley uncovered today, was not out in the open — rather, the funds were transferred through a secretive process and listed only by the organization as ‘advocacy’ spending:

The backchannel spending allowed insurers to publicly stake out a pro-reform position while privately funding the leading anti-reform lobbying group in Washington. The chamber spent tens of millions of dollars bankrolling efforts to kill health care reform.


more at link
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/06/13/499093/health-care-insurers-spent-100-million-to-combat-the-affordable-care-act/




https://www.opensecrets.org/search?order=desc&q=daniel+hilferty&sort=D&type=donors







They are still at it (trying to destroy the public option)


AHIP mobilizes industry opposition to public option (2016 efforts)

https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/ahip-mobilizes-industry-opposition-to-public-option/426659/


Dive Brief:

The leading health insurance industry trade group, America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), launched an effort last week to mobilize members against the growing push for a public option, which would create a government-run health insurance plan to compete with private plans on the ACA exchanges.

AHIP's action alert last week asked its members to contact Senate offices and provided a list of talking points to assist in arguments against the public option, The Huffington Post reported.

The move came within hours of the introduction of a resolution by 27 Senate Democrats, led by Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley, calling for the public option--an idea that President Barack Obama and presidential nominee Hillary Clinton have also recently joined forces to support.

Dive Insight:

AHIP's swift action suggests the group sees the groundswell of support for a public option from legislators and advocates as a real threat. The concept has essentially come back from the dead after raising major debate during the crafting of the ACA, but subsequently being left out of the health law due to concerns among lawmakers, including some liberals, as well as opposition from industry groups.

snip


2019


Partnership Statement On Introduction Of Senate Medicare-X Legislation A Public Option Would Restrict Patient Choice of Plans and Access to Care

https://americashealthcarefuture.org/partnership-statement-on-introduction-of-senate-medicare-x-legislation/


ICYMI: “Medicare Buy-In, Public Option Proposals Would Harm Our Health Care System”

https://americashealthcarefuture.org/icymi-medicare-buy-in-public-option-proposals-would-harm-our-health-care-system/


they also will fight to stop the US government from having the ability to negotiate lower drug prices


A BITTER PILL: HOW BIG PHARMA LOBBIES TO KEEP PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES HIGH

https://www.citizensforethics.org/a-bitter-pill-how-big-pharma-lobbies-to-keep-prescription-drug-prices-high/

[Demsrule86]

66. It will be a battle...if we don't get the senante...I don't know. We beat the GOP up eveyday and

convince folks if they want health care give us the Senate majority...Thank you for the information...this should be a separate post it was wonderful...

[JI7]

59. since when does being a hateful bigoted pervert make them part of the left ?

[HopeAgain]

10. So how about a more moderate embracing MFA?

I thought we were a party of progressive ideals. Not a Republican out there that is medicare eligible that doesn't use it.

[Cha]

24. North Dakota.. but Excellent point.

[Cha]

33. Are these Progressives "timid" as you insult?

Progressives Support Shoring Up ACA Before Tackling Medicare For All

Ocasio-Cortez said she understood prioritizing fixes to the Affordable Care Act. “Because we have a Republican Senate, a Republican president, and so the things that we have the ability to pass right now are pretty narrow,” she said, though she added she wanted hearings on Medicare for All and didn’t think single-payer solutions had been given enough attention from the Democratic caucus yet.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142293852#top

[HopeAgain]

46. I'm not insulting anyone

I'm pointing out that we should not be afraid to bring up MFA and other issues further to the left (student loan forgiveness is another example). There's a lot of people on here who think the campaigning for 2020 should not talk about such things. I agree with AOC:

"Though she added she wanted hearings on Medicare for All and didn’t think single-payer solutions had been given enough attention from the Democratic caucus yet."

Without such discussion we are going to miss out on a lot of voters, especially young ones.

[Indygram]

11. She's partially right...Medicare for America is a far better plan

I don't support single payer. I prefer both private insurance and a public option. That is something that can also pass.

[Celerity]

20. Does she even support a public option? I do not think so.

Any candidate who is against the public option is automatically off my list. The system is broken and we do not have the political power to ram through a straight single payer system on its own, so the public option is the best alternative. Even if there had been zero rethug interference with the ACA, it was always doomed to eventually yield unsustainable rates over the long run, it just slowed the rate of growth down from what they were going up before. Best thing by far was the pre-existing conditions coverage.

[ucrdem]

14. She's right. It's suidicidal.

"Here, take this legislation we spent 80 years trying to pass and give us Trumpcare!"

[Hortensis]

17. A major impetus against the ACA was the name Obama on it.

The entire right, of course, has been determined to erase the Democratic Party and especially Barack Obama from its heritage -- and then relabel it under their name. But a dirty little secret is that a fair number of socially conservative progressives on the left also want that for the same reasons -- it's a giant "establishment" achievement with Obama's name on it, the first an affront to their ideology and self image, the second... Together, these people helped magnify a movement for repeal (and replacement), but for very wrong reasons.

The excuse on both sides for repealing the ACA is that it's absolutely terrible and that leaders on both sides will be able to provide much more for significantly less, all terrifically high minded, yada-yada. Of course, many well-meaning innocents, just wanting the best healthcare possible, were caught up in the claims of the ACA's massive deficiencies, even as it became indispensable to many millions, without realizing that not all the drives to repeal were honorable.

Of course, Sanders' one-choice-for-all with at least initially good coverages would be very different from the destruction RW leaders intend. But while the ACA needs the next, planned increments to become what we need it to be, it is already a tremendous advance in place, not a promise for the future, that works excellently in spite of constant attempts to break it.

And let's point out while we're on the subject that MfA would also be an incremental advance (on the ACA's start!), but one that would require steps backwards and dances in place to design, pass and implement from scratch over several years. And likely full coverages would ultimately require additional incremental advances. Currently Sanders is opposing needed improvements to the ACA, including reduced premiums, for political reasons -- improvement would increase the already considerable satisfaction and diminish the momentum developed for trashing it.

And not least, as noted, while trumpsters are worried about losing the ACA-bird-in-hand, they are not going to stand by quietly while Democrats steal their chance to put their own name on national healthcare. Meanwhile, the dark-money people controlling their party, who intend to destroy ALL chances of any national healthcare program permanently, will be using every weakness and opportunity people on both the left and right open up to do just that.

So we should at least consider whether there is some validity to what Senator Heitkamp has to say -- that our willingness to abandon the ACA and allow Republicans to outlaw it without requiring them to provide a replacement would be very bad strategy. And sure as bread falls butter side down, the ACA's enemies on both right and left would blame loss of national healthcare on the Democratic Party.

[FiveGoodMen]

18. Yes, never fight for what's right

Always triangulate.

[Autumn]

19. Why would we want anything that the Republicans will offer to replace the ACA?

She should put some thought into that, it makes no sense.

[Skya Rhen]

29. What I gather from her is that if Dems run on MFA, Trump wins election and ACA is replaced

with Trumpcare...

[Blue_true]

39. That is EXACTLY what Heidi said.

It is amazing how people see what they want to see in plain language and turn it into something that it isn't.

[ehrnst]

51. They couldn't replace it when they had the house, senate and WH.

And we ran on saving the ACA in 2018, and took back the House.

[ehrnst]

48. She didn't say that that. That's why it "makes no sense" to you. (nt)

[Autumn]

49. I don't want any solution they have to offer for replacing

what they have destroyed. Fuck the Republicans.

[ehrnst]

52. They couldn't find anything to replace the ACA when they had all three branches.

We ran on preserving the ACA in 2018, and took back the house.

[Skya Rhen]

53. Well, we need to make sure that Trump does not win - put the most electable candidate forward

and campaign on a healthcare plan (i.e. improvements to ACA with the addition of a public option) that will not alienate the voters that we need to win...

[Honeycombe8]

21. The problem with the ACA is that a good sized chunk of middle class blue collar...

Americans find that it doesn't work for them. That's partly why some voted for Trump. It wasn't just jobs. He also campaigned heavily on getting rid of the ACA...and he focused on the specific complaints they had.

Healthcare is a YUGE issue. The Democratic candidates should work on getting it right. First, by acknowledging the problems that a chunk of Americans were having with it.

I don't hold much hope on this, though. The candidates without much national experience or health care experience, won't fully understand the individual side of the ACA. Also, that demographic group is not among their core base. And Biden's stance may be to keep the ACA the way it is, because he was in the W.H. when it was passed.

[Demsrule86]

44. An improved ACA is the answer. MFA is not happening. Those who have work insurance will

Punish those who try to force this down their throats. MFA would cost me a fortune with five family members to insure.

[Honeycombe8]

58. An employer based insurance is part of the problem, IMO.

So many people are self-employed or don't get ins. through their employer. Or lose ins. when they get laid off.

Anyway, I was just pointing out that this issue is still out there. There was a group of middle class people for whom this issue was high priority, and the ACA was not workable for them.

I don't know how you would know that MFA would cost a family more than the ACA. But if it does, that is the complaint by that group of middle class regarding the ACA. That it was unaffordable for them, and they couldn't buy a lesser policy that they could afford...things like that. Whatever all those complaints were.

[Demsrule86]

61. The ACA could work with reform. It is all we have. My family members are on medicare

And between the wraps and premiums, they pay more than me...there is no family plan either. The ACA is a known entity. And can not be demonized. The ACA WITH a public option makes sense. My employee subsidizes my insurance. I am not alone. We can get to universal health care but Medicare for all will be problematic.

[ehrnst]

50. Democrats got the first real large scale health care reform passed since the 60's.

We ran on preserving and restoring it in 2018, and took back the house.

[BeckyDem]

25. Yea, stand for nothing.

ugh.

[Cha]

31. Progressives Support Shoring Up ACA Before Tackling Medicare For All

Ocasio-Cortez said she understood prioritizing fixes to the Affordable Care Act. “Because we have a Republican Senate, a Republican president, and so the things that we have the ability to pass right now are pretty narrow,” she said, though she added she wanted hearings on Medicare for All and didn’t think single-payer solutions had been given enough attention from the Democratic caucus yet.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142293852#top

[Chin music]

27. 60 votes to overturn Obamacare....

zero for impeachment yet.

[wasupaloopa]

32. MFA is not popular with those who have good

affordable insurance.

Instead of forcing everyone into one system, I think a public option is a better idea.

No matter what we do it will not be government provided health care.

The private insurance industry is not going away.

Better to have affordable health care for all

[Blue_true]

40. I agree. Offer Medicare buyin in the ACA for those that need it.

Leave people that are ok with their private insurance alone. Shore up Medicaid for people that can't afford a Medicare buyin premium.

[Kurt V.]

34. i appreciate the good fight heitkamp has fought during her tenure. her time has passed and

her opinion is worthless for the times we're in.

[Demsrule86]

43. She is correct . MFA is a political loser in the general.

[Cha]

36. Progressives Support Shoring Up ACA Before Tackling Medicare For All

Ocasio-Cortez said she understood prioritizing fixes to the Affordable Care Act. “Because we have a Republican Senate, a Republican president, and so the things that we have the ability to pass right now are pretty narrow,” she said, though she added she wanted hearings on Medicare for All and didn’t think single-payer solutions had been given enough attention from the Democratic caucus yet.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142293852#top

[CentralMass]

37. Of note the majority of our presidential candidates support medicare for all.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/policy-2020/medicare-for-all/
here 2020 Democrats stand on
Medicare-for-all
Tap for more information

SUPPORTS
SOME
VERSION OF IT

Not all have been specific about how far they’re willing to go in support of single-payer health care.

Booker
Buttigieg
Castro
Gabbard
Gillibrand
Harris
Messam
Sanders
Warren
Williamson

Yang
PREFERS
SOMETHING
ELSE

Others have proposed different plans to reach universal coverage, such as providing a public option.

Delaney
Hickenlooper
Inslee
Klobuchar
O'Rourke
Swalwell


https://www.axios.com/2020-presidential-candidates-medicare-for-all-7d958bab-de34-4d8c-921d-b561f201c4c2.html

"The Medicare for All bill from Sen. Bernie Sanders has 16 co-sponsors including several 2020 Democrats. Both Sanders' bill and a bill from Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) lay out paths for eliminating private health insurance. Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) reintroduced a bill in February that offers a buy-in option.
Medicare For All
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.): Wants to eliminate private insurance and establish a single source of health-care coverage for prescriptions, medical, vision, dental and mental health care.
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) has stuck by Sanders' bill, telling CNN's Jake Tapper that the U.S. needs to eliminate going through an insurance company and "move on." She also co-sponsored the Medicare at 50 Act and Schatz's State Public Option Act.
Former HUD Secretary Julián Castro: Supports it, saying at an event with Iowa Democrats that the U.S. should "be the healthiest nation," per the Hill.
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii): Supports Medicare for All, but doesn't want to eliminate private insurance.

New Age spiritual guru Marianne Williamson: Supports a "Medicare for All model," according to her campaign website.

"Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) is a co-sponsor of Sen. Debbie Stabenow's Medicare at 50 Act, which allows ages 50 to 64 to buy into Medicare. Booker is a co-sponsor on Sanders' bill."
"Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) is a co-sponsor on Sanders' bill and supports Medicare at 50 Act."

[Blue_true]

41. I remember Buttigieg saying that he supports Medicare buyin for those that need it.

The buyin would be added to the ACA.

[Celerity]

64. yes, he does NOT support the Sanders plan, which is politically impossible in today's political

environment. Even getting a public option (the optional Medicare buy-in) will be so so hard I fear, as I can see multiple Democrats defections in the Senate and voting against it (ironically Heitkamp would have been one likely candidate to do that, along with Manchin, etc) even if we take back the Senate.

[dlk]

54. Let's Not Forget the Millions Who Like Their Employer's Health Plan

[comradebillyboy]

63. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush...

the ACA actually exists and MFA doesn't. Don't trade something for nothing.