The proposed new Senate Bill opening Medicare for 55-65 year olds makes Single Payer more possible

[zulchzulu]

Granted, the new Senate proposals opening up Medicare for 55-65 year olds is still not fully out there, but you have to actually look at how ingenious this proposal actually could be. Aside from the other benefits of stopping the pre-existing condition clause that insurance companies have used to stop coverage, there are two essential bonuses to this plan.

1. It changes the argument that Republicans have been using to try to stop the Public Option. They would have to impossibly pivot the argument that they don't think Medicare for 55-65 year olds is a good thing. That is an incredibly large voting base as well as for them to try to stop Medicare coverage for that age sector would be bordering on political suicide. Imagine political ads showing people in that age range being told that the Republican Party didn't think they should have affordable heathcare.

It also turns out that the Medicare for 55-65 year olds option would actually cover more people than the watered-down Public Option that was in legislation.

2. Medicare for 55-65 year olds as a policy would make it essentially Single Payer Medicare for people 55 years old and upward. Once the legislation is passed, it could then be amended to make it available in a year for 45 year olds. A year later (perhaps), it would be available for 35 year olds. Incrementally, it would make Single Payer insurance available for all in a faster process than it would to just have a watered-down Public Option.

I've been for Single Payer for years, but I see this new possible legislation a very possible way to get to that point.

[RDANGELO]

1. I agree 100%

It puts in place something that can be expanded later. Medicare is competing with the insurance companies.

[bluestateguy]

2. In a few years we can shoot to lower the age limit down to 50

Then 45 in a few more years, and so on...

[Better Believe It]

18. As the age for full Social Security is raised to 70 with payment cuts.

Medicare won't be lowered to 50 unless liberals/progressives control Congress and the White House.

[KrR]

23. Would you have said 55 last week? n/t

[GoCubsGo]

3. Ezra Klein made a pretty good argument in favor of this on Monday

He explained on "Countdown" why this option is better than the public option that was proposed. And, as Keith pointed out, this was Howard Dean's idea. I don't like that it leaves out those of us under 55. However, the Public Option as it stood in the bill was pretty worthless. I'm for single payer, too, but don't believe it's possible to jump right into it in the current political climate. Unfortunately, too many people in this country are fearful of any different, and incapable of critical thought. They buy into all the right-wing propaganda way too easily, and the polls indicate they're doing that in spades. I think this legislation opens the door to single payer. Sadly, it has to be eased into in order not to freak out the bed-wetters. I wish it weren't that way. I wish I didn't have to think of my fellow countrypeople as mindless, propaganda-vulnerable bed-wetters.

The Ezra Klein segment on "Countdown":
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/#34319685

[HopeOverFear]

4. SHHHHH....don't tell the blue dogs that....

they think they're screwing us over...keep it on the D.L.....shhhhhh

[waterscalm]

5. the buy in does not even start till 2011 and it is NOT subsidized.

[SpartanDem]

6. not at first

but it will be when the exchange opens

[Liberation Angel]

8. but, but Dean likes it...

i tend to agree with you but maybe its baby steps in the right direction

[no limit]

7. Has the age ever been lowered since medicare has started? What makes you think this will continue?

It doesn't seem like we get very many chances at healthcare reform. This issue won't be revisted for decades, so whatever healthcare bill is passed this year we will be stuck with for a very long time; and in my opinion thinking they'll just keep improving on it each year is a pipe dream.

[BeyondGeography]

9. Should also make employment more secure for people in their 50's

All of a sudden, we're not so expensive for our employers anymore.

All of a sudden, they can't make us endure any and all forms of abuse just because we need their health insurance.

[Clio the Leo]

10. Excellent point. NT

[fishnfla]

16. The flip side of that equation is

and correct me if I am wrong, but folks that are able to retire at that age no longer have to stay employed just to maintain health coverage. If they are able to retire that can open up room for new employees

[Kber]

19. Assuming access to employer based health care does not disqualify you for medicare eligibility

[andym]

11. I was surprised that the conservative dems would agree

It seemed like the expansion of Medicare was not politically possible. Perhaps the House will expand it even further during negotiations...

[KrR]

24. Bluedogs constituents...

don't know Medicare is govt run... So WE take advantage of the stupidity... this time.

[PHIMG]

12. The big single payer groups are MUTE on the issue

CalNurses, PNHP, HCN have not come out on a position.

[zulchzulu]

14. Give them a day or so to digest the possible legislation n/t

[Jersey Devil]

13. Yes, little steps can lead to big reform

Ask the grasshopper

[treestar]

15. True

It's a lot of baby boomers, and that is a bulge in the population - going to be a huge number.

This country does have single payer for the elderly so moving that age down further and further could get us there.

[fishnfla]

17. I think it is a good first step

more I think about it

[ipaint]

20. Yes the now much more powerful insurance companies are going

to roll over year after year and watch as we the people, through our stuffed with ins.$$$$ representatives in congress, put them out of business.
Anyone informed wall street?

[R. P. McMurphy]

21. k & r n/t

[Pushed To The Left]

22. K&R!

[zulchzulu]

25. Kick for ballance n/t