Warren told CBS reporter last night she won't be releasing her own health care plan. MFA is it.

[highplainsdem]

Tweet from Caitlin Huey-Burns, political reporter for CBS:

Link to tweet

I asked Elizabeth Warren if she is going to release her own health care plan. She said MFA is her plan, just because someone else has had a good idea doesn’t mean she needs to come out with a separate one

[LincolnRossiter]

1. She never struck me as the stiff-necked ideologue that Bernie is, so I can't see why she's digging

in on an unpopular proposal.

[LudwigPastorius]

3. Maybe she believes it is the right thing to do, even if it's not incredibly popular?

Or, maybe you have to take a initial position beyond what you will settle for because all legislation is a compromise.

Obamacare started out with a public option that was shot down by the GOP and Joe Lieberman.

[LincolnRossiter]

8. Why is it "more right" than a system that ensures coverage for everyone while allowing those who

would choose private and/or supplemental plans the option to do so.

Maybe she is staking out a more controversial position in hopes of getting a compromise later, but that's an iffy proposition in electoral politics. May as well just state your actual position and work to get it implemented.

[HerbChestnut]

10. Biden's plan does not ensure health insurance coverage for everyone.

10 million people will still be without insurance under his plan.

[LincolnRossiter]

17. His current plan could leave between 2-3% of Americans uninsured, which is

about 6-10 million people. I imagine that will have to be reworked to get support from the progressive wing of the party.

[brooklynite]

29. Of course, Warren's plan could end up leaving MORE people without healthcare...

...if she can't convince people to vote for her.

[cilla4progress]

28. Good perspective,

thanks. Agreed.

[Demsrule86]

31. We can't lose to fucking Trump so don't run on unpopular policy...politics 101.

I will not vote for Warren in a primary...only a general.

[still_one]

2. What Senator Warren, and anyone else proposing M4A is how will it be paid for. You cannot just say

the top 1 to 2% richest people will do it, because that won't be enough. We need more specifics.

This isn't a jab at those proposing M4A, but they really need to be specific on the costs and where it will come from

I think many people don't understand the costs associated with Medicare Part A, B, D, supplemental plans, advantage plans etc. It isn't free.

To give you an idea, just for Part A, if people were to buy into Part A today, because they didn't pay Medicare Taxes, the costs would be:

"Most people don't pay a monthly premium for Part A (sometimes called "premium-free Part A". If you buy Part A, you'll pay up to $437 each month. If you paid Medicare taxes for less than 30 quarters, the standard Part A premium is $437. If you paid Medicare taxes for 30-39 quarters, the standard Part A premium is $240."

Here is a breakdown of other associated costs:

https://www.medicare.gov/your-medicare-costs/medicare-costs-at-a-glance

The bottom line is how will it be paid for needs to be detailed, adding a whole influx of people who haven't paid Medicare Taxes throughout their lives, has to be paid somehow

[HerbChestnut]

6. Trying to compare current Medicare costs/coverage to M4A doesn't work.

M4A dramatically overhauls what Medicare is and does. Of course M4A will be paid for by an increase in taxes, but that will be more than offset by a reduction in overall healthcare costs as predicted by many cost estimates (search google). The reason Bernie or Elizabeth don't explicitly say that during a debate or an interview is because they know media outlets will crop a soundbite about "RaIsInG TaXeS!1!1!!" and plaster it all over TV and the web. Moderate Democrats do not help clarify the matter when they use similar arguments espoused by Republicans or the health insurance industry.

[LincolnRossiter]

11. Bernie has explicited said that middle class taxes will go up to pay for it.

Gotta give him respect for the honesty there.

[HerbChestnut]

13. Right, and just to be clear...

...that tax increase will be more than offset by overall savings on healthcare costs. The average family in America will likely save thousands of dollars per year under M4A according to many cost estimates. This isn't some pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking. M4A is a single payer health insurance program designed after many functional and established systems in other countries.

[Hoyt]

21. Then Sanders/Warren need to say - "For a family of 4 making $X, your taxes will increase Y.

Any other taxes -- such as on corporations, wealth taxes, etc. -- should be specified.

If there will be no other costs -- like deductibles, coinsurance, dental, etc., as these two are promising -- voters can decide whether they believe it. Neither candidate has done that. The "It will be less than what we are spending now in the aggregate" is just not enough for most people.

Also, the amount necessary for healthcare should not be touted in isolation from the other "big ideas" they are offering -- free college, debt forgiveness, climate change, job training, shoring up Social Security, deficit/debt reduction, childcare, etc.

All of those are worthy ideas, and lots of people need it. Just tell us what it is going to cost.

[qazplm135]

36. this is true and something I don't understand why she doesn't do

she's overall correct, the cost of health care will go down but taxes will go up less.

So, she simply needs to fill in the details...health care costs you X right now, by switching to MFA, health care will cost you X-Y which is what you will pay in taxes (or words to that effect). The difference will be made up by a tax on this top 2 percent or that wall street transaction...and overall you will pay less just doing it through taxes, but your healthcare will be better and you won't have to worry about losing it because you don't work or because you change jobs.

That's "sellable." For some reason though, it's not being sold with that level of detail.

[still_one]

43. Exactly. Thank-you for articulating it so well

[peggysue2]

34. I, too, give Sanders credit on that admission

At least he's being honest about taxes across the board. What none of the Medicare 4 All supporters will say is the 'level' of taxation to expand Medicare far beyond what is offered now. There's a reason for that:

Americans hate taxes, period. You can dress it up with talk about no deductibles and co-pays but the phrase 'tax increase' produces a visceral reaction in the vast majority of the public.

As Shumlin and his colleagues in Vermont found out that tax burden turned out to be onerous on business and residents alike without reducing coverage levels people already had. Without addressing the explosive costs of healthcare services and pharmaceuticals, the Medicare 4 All package is doomed to fail. Be it state level or nationally. First steps first. Bring costs down while providing the greatest good for the greatest number of people with the ultimate goal of universal healthcare coverage. This isn't going to be done quickly. Americans have healthcare concerns and needs right now, in the moment. So, the idea of taking away the coverage they have does not play well, something underscored by current polling.

Let's not pretend any of this is going to be easy. We saw the Battle Royale that Obama & Pelosi faced pushing the ACA through. That was with a Senate majority and a 70% public approval for healthcare reform. It was still tough. Past is prelude.

[DrToast]

14. "RaIsInG TaXeS!1!1!!"

I agree that the media will freak out over that, but the way to change the narrative is to address it head on, not ignore it.

If taxes are going to go up, Warren should explain why that’s a good thing and why people will get more for their money that way. That seems to be what she’s implying, and that’s a legitimate position, but I think she should embrace that position.

“Yes, your taxes are going to go up and here’s why that’s better for Americans...”

[still_one]

26. First of all I agree it cannot be done during a debate, and I didn't mean to suggest that, but they

have to outline it with more details, and saying that it will be offset with the vague statement, "by a reduction in overall healthcare costs" isn't going to cut it either, and it is more than just increased taxes, which was the reason I brought in the costs for Medicare today if people were to BUY INTO IT who haven't paid through Medicare Taxes, because that gives you a reference point of premium costs, and that was just for Medicare Part A. Part B will cost another 130 some dollars a month, plus a supplemental plan. While that could also be rolled into an advantage plan, to reduce costs, it will also limit flexibility of where you can go, and involve rationing.

It is more than just increased taxes, the new incoming people coming into Medicare will have to pay premiums. How much will those be?
Those currently on Medicare have already paid those premiums for Medicare Part A, and they still have to pay additional premiums for Part B, C, D, or supplemental plans depending what options they choose.

and yes, even with premiums being paid, taxes will still need to be increased, and that information should be upfront. It isn't just about "raising taxes", you are getting something back for raising those taxes, and that is healthcare coverage.

I understand the taboo about raising taxes, but the fact is where do people think all the services from infrastructures, police, fire, etc. come from. Our taxes. Who is fooling who. There is nothing wrong with paying taxes if they are spent for what they are intended for

The other issues are that a good number of people want keep their current coverage. One size does not fit all.

A lot more details need to be outlined, otherwise it means very little. Will M4A be mandatory? How will it effect those currently on Medicare? What if people want to keep their current coverage? etc.

[highplainsdem]

12. Sanders has admitted taxes will go up even on the middle class. Warren dodges questions about that.

She did last night, and she did talking to Chris Matthews on another debate night.

I've seen her supporters applaud her for dodging the question.

But I've also seen comments that she keeps being evasive, and that might not impress people who aren't already her supporters.

OTOH, her evasiveness seemed wonderfully impressive one pundit, but I think that deserves a separate OP...

[emmaverybo]

35. While we are on that subject, how, in addition to the one proposal, pay for all the others she has

made?

She supports GND and proposes in addition: free 2 and 4 year college, universal childcare,
95 percent student debt cancellation, affordable housing, better housing for military families, 200 billion dollars for opioid crisis, 50 billion for black colleges, 200 more per month per person social security.

I see no proposals to protect current social security, Medicaid, Medicare—all under threat. I see no
proposals to fix broken, underfunded, or imperiled CURRENT social programs. We also need to make a sizable investment in infrastructure. And we need resources for 11 million immigrants we must put on a path to citizenship if we are to have sane and humane immigration reform. We also
must provide lawyers and judges to process asylum claims ASAP. We should be taking in a great many asylum seekers if we re-establish the criteria for being approved to enter the US.

We have a historically high deficit.

I can only think that we will be taxed much, much more if Warren makes good on these promises.
I am willing to pay more, but I don’t want M4All, believe debt relief can be given without going to the extent of 95 percent cancellation, think massive foreclosures need to be addressed, would prefer a reform of our welfare system, and more money to provide food stamps, than a token 200 per month in social security, want to see investment in two year colleges that are unable to accommodate demand and need to expand vocational offerings, and so much else fixing and protecting that bold, new ideas, giving to high income folksalong with low income are not speaking to.

These bold new ideas might juice things up in an election year. They sound good. But they do not
take into account what is not currently working in an array of social needs programs, other large and ongoing investments we must make, other types of crippling debt than student debt, or that as a country we are severely indebted. They are token and selective investments. Unfortunately, they are also potentially political killers.

[HerbChestnut]

4. That's awesome.

Thanks, Elizabeth!

[Mike 03]

5. I wish she'd leave herself a little wriggle room.

In my family my mother and at least one of my sisters are strong Warren supporters, but all three of us are worried about Medicare for All. We don't want to lose this election on this issue.

[HerbChestnut]

7. M4A is the best health insurance plan out there.

Warren supporting it is a huge plus for the country.

[Mike 03]

16. Every single thing you wrote is probably true.

But can she beat Trump?

[vsrazdem]

23. I defintely see her on a debate stage pummeling Trump. Biden, no so sure about.

[emmaverybo]

38. It is doubtful anyone will be on a debate stage with him. Anyone who brings the case against Trump

will be seen to “win” by those already inclined against him and seen to “lose” by all those who continue to support him.

Biden was the first candidate to bring a substantive case against Trump in the launch of his campaign. He has continued to make that case more strongly than any others. The case Biden makes is one that has the potential to stir the hearts, not only the minds, of the largest numbers of Americans:

Snip——————————by Jonathan Capeheart for WaPo

Joe Biden reminded all of us of what a presidential president would sound like

What gave Biden’s address more power was that it wasn’t just a harangue against Trump. It was a reminder of who we are as a nation, “the soul of America,” as he called it.

Snip———————————-Biden

What this president doesn’t understand is that unlike every other nation on earth, we're unable to define what constitutes "American" by religion, by ethnicity, or by tribe; you can't do it.
America is an idea. An idea stronger than any army, bigger than any ocean, more powerful than any dictator or tyrant. It gives hope to the most desperate people on earth….
The most powerful idea in the history of the world I think beats in the hearts of the people of this country. And it beats in all of us. No matter your race, your ethnicity. No matter your gender identity, your sexual orientation. No matter your faith. It beats in the heart of rich and poor alike. It unites America -- whether your ancestors were Native to these shores or they were brought here forcibly and enslaved, whether they were immigrants generations back, like my family from Ireland, or those coming today looking to build a better life for your family.
The American creed – that we are all created equal –was written long-ago. But the genius of every generation of Americans has opened it wider and wider and wider, to include those who have been excluded in a previous generation. That’s why it has never gathered dust in the history books.

[TreasonousBastard]

9. Wriggle room is important. This will be hard to sell in the general.

[DrFunkenstein]

15. I Think This Might Be Her Creating Wiggle Room

I might be wrong, but it seems odd that she wouldn't release her own plan when having "a plan for that" is her calling card. I would imagine that she probably believes this is the right thing to do (as do I), but doesn't want to to paint herself in a corner over this issue.

Overhauling health care would spend a great deal of political capital, and I feel like there are other massive battles that she is prioritizing.

[TreasonousBastard]

18. Hope so. If she wins the nod, I'd hate to see her go down over health care.

[Mike 03]

20. Insightful.

You may have hit on something here. This makes a lot of sense.

[calguy]

19. But I thought she has an iron clad plan for everything?

[madville]

22. She must not want to win

Because most Americans want private insurance options and are very pleased with their current insurance plans.

[vsrazdem]

24. Says who? I don't know of a single person that is happy with their current insurance plan,

but hey, that's only me, maybe you have more specific knowledge that I do.

[madville]

25. The USC LA Times poll from a few days ago

Only 38 percent of voters favor MFA. 48% favor a government run public option with private insurance still available is one so chooses.

[floppyboo]

33. doesn't help running pharma and insurance co. fear ads during the debate

Seems that maybe alot of people with worries about M4A are more concerned about what other people think, and are hedging their bets out of fear.
Primaries should be a time to stand proud for good ideas. Showing weak points in confidence now is toxic.

[DrFunkenstein]

39. That's Not a Measure of Who is Happy With Their Insurance

The ACA was averaging roughly 51% disapproval with approval almost never above 50%. Republicans' opposition to the ACA helped them win control of the House in 2010, control of the Senate in 2014, and the presidency in 2016

People really did not approve of it until they realized what they would lose if Trump wasn't so incompetent in his efforts to end it. But it was the best for the country, which is why Obama deserves so much credit for that fight.

People generally hate profit-driven insurance companies, but they tend to be afraid of what would replace it.

[Demsrule86]

30. This is another reason why I hope to God she is not the nominee...we will lose the general...trying

to force folks off of workplace insurance no matter how much 'transition' she suggests is a lose lose issue...I would vote for her but she looses in a landslide...the union voters we need in the mid west won't vote for her...which means kiss the EC and victory goodbye.

[OnDoutside]

32. For a fantastic campaign, this is a monumental mistake.

[crazytown]

41. A monumental mistake for the GE perhaps

but not the nomination. It suits her purposes to have Sanders in the race about 15%, while side stepping attacks by the left on health.

[OnDoutside]

45. Yes I agree she had to neutralise that alright but she will have to do

a huge pivot if she gets the nomination. I am not sure she'd be able to do so, which is a pity because she would make a fantastic President.

[crazytown]

46. FWIW, I see it as a huge vulnerability as well

but not as bad as her plan to decriminalize the border.

[OnDoutside]

47. Oh yes, I forgot about that.

[elocs]

37. Will she be releasing a realistic process of how it will become law

or how many years it would take to become law, if ever?
So there is no plan B, it's MFA or nothing. What would she tell people who might expect MFA to happen if she is elected and it doesn't happen?

[TCJ70]

40. Does anyone ask Biden these same questions?

Why is it always the people who want to try to go the furthest are the only ones who get these questions? It's a goal. Not a promise. Something to work toward. And if she doesn't make it...at least she tried...and I'd rather have that than aiming for small steps and ending up with nothing.

[elocs]

42. What's plan B when MFA goes nowhere?

Or is it MFA or nothing?
I want to hear what Warren will do and not a deflection about Biden.

[TCJ70]

48. I wasn't trying to deflect, but I can see how it looks that way. Plan B?

What presidential candidate talks about one of their big issues failing? This line of questioning is just not valid in my opinion.

[BlueMississippi]

44. oh ... she doesn't have a plan for "that"