Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
"Hillary Clinton and her supporters are making a terrible argument for gradualism"
However, Hillary Clinton and her supporters are making a terrible argument for gradualism.
For all that Bernie Sanders has been criticized for not having a detailed enough plan for his single payer proposal, the following is the grand total of Hillary Clinton’s proposals for health care reform on her website:
These random paragraphs and bullet points, needless to say, don’t exactly live up to even the basic requirements for a health care plan, let alone the more stringent standards being applied to Bernie Sanders’ proposals. And while Hillary Clinton’s campaign did send out a four page PDF last year, it’s notable that you can’t find it in the health care section of her own website, and even then it’s still rather bare-bones and small potatoes at that
What’s missing in all of this is a sense of directionality – how any of these changes will lead to a genuine universal health care system. There’s nothing here about covering the seven million immigrants who don’t qualify for Medicaid or health insurance subsidies, or the four million Americans who are stuck in the Medicaid gap in the red states, or the 7.7 million young people who aren’t getting health insurance from their employers and who can’t afford the premiums on the exchanges, or the 14.4 million other Americans who aren’t going to be covered either. There’s nothing here about expanding the tax credit subsidies on the exchanges to make health insurance genuinely affordable, or increasing minimum insurance standards to make insurance plans provide quality health coverage. And there’s certainly nothing here about improving on the Medicaid expansion by creating a genuine public option – let alone how we could build upon public programs to gradually achieve a single payer system. This is kind of weird when you think about it, because this is all pretty obvious stuff that even a young policy-blogging grad student like me thought of back in 2010.
And I think this is at least a small part of why Hillary Clinton is getting thumped by Bernie Sanders among young voters
...
And this brings me to an important topic. There are genuine limitations to the ACA, but the ACA is being used by some Democrats to block further health care reform. We see in in the national primaries, where Clinton and her surrogates argue that Bernie’s proposals for single payer threaten to undo Obamacare. But we’re also seeing it at the state level – for example, in California in 2012, California’s single-payer bill was defeated when six Democrats in the state legislature walked sideways, arguing that the state needed to focus on implementing the ACA instead. In 2014, a Democratic insurance commissioner’s initiative to give the commissioner the power to reject health insurance premium increases was defeated after a campaign that argued that this would destroy the ACA.
And that, combined with a national campaign that’s simultaneously trying to tell me that Clinton is a genuine progressive, no really, and that single payer is never ever going to happen, makes me suspicious that all of this talk about building on the ACA to make a better system isn’t sincere gradualism. Rather, it starts to sound like the ACA is being used as ideological cover to let moderates push back on attempts to push the Democratic Party to the left without having to stand and declare who they really are.
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2016/02/gradualism-and-single-payer#more-78727
For all that Bernie Sanders has been criticized for not having a detailed enough plan for his single payer proposal, the following is the grand total of Hillary Clinton’s proposals for health care reform on her website:
“Defend the Affordable Care Act and build on it to slow the growth of out-of-pocket costs.”
“Hillary will continue to defend the Affordable Care Act (ACA) against Republican efforts to repeal it. She’ll build on it to expand affordable coverage, slow the growth of overall health care costs (including prescription drugs), and make it possible for providers to deliver the very best care to patients.”
... (more points)
These random paragraphs and bullet points, needless to say, don’t exactly live up to even the basic requirements for a health care plan, let alone the more stringent standards being applied to Bernie Sanders’ proposals. And while Hillary Clinton’s campaign did send out a four page PDF last year, it’s notable that you can’t find it in the health care section of her own website, and even then it’s still rather bare-bones and small potatoes at that
What’s missing in all of this is a sense of directionality – how any of these changes will lead to a genuine universal health care system. There’s nothing here about covering the seven million immigrants who don’t qualify for Medicaid or health insurance subsidies, or the four million Americans who are stuck in the Medicaid gap in the red states, or the 7.7 million young people who aren’t getting health insurance from their employers and who can’t afford the premiums on the exchanges, or the 14.4 million other Americans who aren’t going to be covered either. There’s nothing here about expanding the tax credit subsidies on the exchanges to make health insurance genuinely affordable, or increasing minimum insurance standards to make insurance plans provide quality health coverage. And there’s certainly nothing here about improving on the Medicaid expansion by creating a genuine public option – let alone how we could build upon public programs to gradually achieve a single payer system. This is kind of weird when you think about it, because this is all pretty obvious stuff that even a young policy-blogging grad student like me thought of back in 2010.
And I think this is at least a small part of why Hillary Clinton is getting thumped by Bernie Sanders among young voters
...
And this brings me to an important topic. There are genuine limitations to the ACA, but the ACA is being used by some Democrats to block further health care reform. We see in in the national primaries, where Clinton and her surrogates argue that Bernie’s proposals for single payer threaten to undo Obamacare. But we’re also seeing it at the state level – for example, in California in 2012, California’s single-payer bill was defeated when six Democrats in the state legislature walked sideways, arguing that the state needed to focus on implementing the ACA instead. In 2014, a Democratic insurance commissioner’s initiative to give the commissioner the power to reject health insurance premium increases was defeated after a campaign that argued that this would destroy the ACA.
And that, combined with a national campaign that’s simultaneously trying to tell me that Clinton is a genuine progressive, no really, and that single payer is never ever going to happen, makes me suspicious that all of this talk about building on the ACA to make a better system isn’t sincere gradualism. Rather, it starts to sound like the ACA is being used as ideological cover to let moderates push back on attempts to push the Democratic Party to the left without having to stand and declare who they really are.
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2016/02/gradualism-and-single-payer#more-78727
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
