IMO, this the time for the DNC to start a push for single payer like most countries in the EU and NA

[CK_John]

It may be a socialist idea but it seems to be the only one that works.

We need to get our leaders in both houses and bite the bullet and work for a realistic healthcare.

Our motto should be Churchill, The US will always pick the best way, once they try every other way.

[RKP5637]

1. Yes! n/t

[onlyadream]

2. Yes!!! This clusterf$@k of repeal/replace resets the stage for more discussion on single payer

While I love Obama, he took single payer off the table too soon, and many on the left were disappointed. Now is another chance to get this right.

[still_one]

4. They didn't have the votes among the blue dogs. However, rather than focus on what shoulda been

it is far more productive to focus on what should be done.

The best way to do that is by people contacting their representatives and Senators and letting them know.

Also, nothing prevents states from instituting their own single payer plan, and people of those respective states should contact their state legislatures to encourage such a thing.

[fallout87]

23. Good point

Why isn't there one state that has instituted single payer? If we can get just one state and show that it works, the rest may follow.

[still_one]

24. California is working on it. It's on hold right now because they are waiting to see what

happens with the ACA so they can determine how much funding will be provided by the feds, and they can then determine how much funding will be required of taxpayers. While some were frustrated by the hold that was done, the bill does need those details to be completed, along with details regarding distribution of services.

The good news is that the bill was NOT killed outright. The bad news is that the bill was put on hold, no matter how good the reasons.

This means that it will be up the people to contact their representatives to insure the bill does not remain in limbo.

Regardless, it is going to be a long road

[R B Garr]

28. CA Assembly Speaker Rendon is getting death threats

I heard it on the radio a few days ago.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article158738529.html

[onlyadream]

67. I think NY is also working on it

It came up in my facebook feed. It was a message to call Albany and say no to single payer. All the comments were completely for it, not against.

[CK_John]

5. There is a time to go foward, now is the time, it wasn't then.

[Demsrule86]

42. there was not enough votes for single payer in the House or the Senate.

Reality bites. We were lucky to get then ACA...and many good Dems sacrificed their political careers to get it and it has saved thousands of lives...single payer is complicated. I have family in the UK. We can't get it now in any case and by not fighting to save the ACA , we play into the GOP hands are likely to have nothing in the end.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

59. There may well have been, but the Democratic Party leadership decided, in their

infinite wisdom, not to allow any consideration of single payer. Not even as a starting point for negotiating.

[Demsrule86]

61. No there was not enough votes. It has nothing to do with the Democratic Party or leadership.

Also, there were never enough votes in the Senate ...we had three or four conservadems and Lieberman. I am so sorry that reality intrudes on your idea of Democratic leadership failure, but it is not accurate.

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

64. Single payer was taken off the table at the very beginning. I recall that quite clearly.

It was the Democratic leadership that took it off. They refused even to keep it as a negotiating point, which was seen by many of us outside the leadership as a huge failure. They started from a position of weakness. That is accurate.

[Demsrule86]

66. Because they couldn't get the votes in the Senate or in the House...so they got what they

could. We had a number of conservadems in the Senate...including Sen. Lincoln , Mary Landrieu,Ben Nelson, Joe Lieberman, and Max Baucus ...there are more. I suggest you read up on the Stupak Democrats in the House.

http://www.politico.com/story/2009/12/stupak-aims-to-sink-unacceptable-abortion-compromise-030811

[PoindexterOglethorpe]

69. I was paying attention back when the ACA was first proposed.

And the very first thing they did was take single payer off the table. No vote counting ahead of time. Just No Single Payer. At the very least they should have presented it at first as a negotiating point.

[Demsrule86]

70. Right because they had the Stupak brigade who said never single payer in the house and Landreiu,

Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson and Lieberman in the Senate.

[still_one]

3. I agree, it would be a good time for Democrats to bring it up now, if for nothing else as an option.

However, with the republican controlled Congress, it isn't going to see the light of day there, and realistically it is going to be difficult to get agreement even among Congressional Democrats, especially blue dogs, and those in red states, but it should be part of the discussion

At the same time, Congressional Democrats have to do what they can to insure that if the ACA is repealed by the republicans, any replacement needs to be equal to or better than the ACA, which there is no sign that is going to happen.

Personally, the best we can hope for right now I believe is a delay until 2018 where we need to take control of at least on of the Houses, or I think the likelihood of an progressive healthcare proposals will be put decades behind at the federal level.

If that is the case, the only option people would have would be at the state level.

California put their Single Payer bill on hold until they can see how the current Congress deals with the ACA, since state funding depends on that, and that would be used as part of the way to finance Single Payer in California.

Regardless, it should be brought into the discussion at the federal level, and people should contact their Representatives and Senators to encourage them to do so.

[crosinski]

6. Yes, it's time!

And I like your motto too, although I think I has too many words. After the level of intelligence displayed in the last election, I'm pretty sure we need to keep it three words or under. Sadly, I'm not joking.

[OnDoutside]

7. What research have you done into single payer in the EU ?

There are many different models in the EU, some work better than others. I believe healthcare is a right, but we need to be clear exactly what that means, and how it will be funded into the future. You could bring in a single payer model tomorrow, but you can bet a future Republican house would act to undermine it as they have done with ACA.

[CK_John]

10. Perfection is the god of procrastination.

[OnDoutside]

11. More a case of "Be careful what you wish for" ! The NHS in the UK is creaking at the seams because

the Tory government is cutting the hell out of it. My wife has two nieces working in the NHS, one as a doctor and the other as a radiographer, and they talk of scheduled operations being cancelled to save money, a shortage of general practitioners, with the ones who are there being maxed out on the number of new NHS patients they can take on, and then constant fights between unions and management.

Here in Ireland, Public health care is means tested, and there is only so much money in the system. There would be adequate money to run a decent system but there is massive waste of money because ALL the unions (from nurses to doctors to consultants to admin to management etc) won't agree to the required changes, in case their members might have to give something up. So nothing changes. There is no reason what you couldn't have a State run health service, but when the employees are virtually unfireable, huge inefficiencies result. It doesn't have to be that way.

[CK_John]

13. Tory equals TeaParty, IMO, the GOP wishes it was still still part of the Commonwealth.

Ireland also leaves behind a lot of dirty laundry.

Any system has it's problem, the question is do we as a people believe health care is a right. We do or we don't. If we do we have to invest in it and make the public dollars help the most people and demand that the best officials run the system wisely.

[OnDoutside]

14. The Tories certainly contain TeaParty NJs, overall being like the GOP.

I'm interested to know about this dirty laundry Ireland leaves behind ?

Of course it should be a right and I agree that it has to be invested in, but when I read many comments here that single payer is the only way to go, I worry how many know exactly what that means, as well as understanding the pitfalls that can happen. If you look at how the Reps undercut the legs of the ACA, there's no expectation that they will have a better nature to appeal to.

[CK_John]

15. The Magdalene asylum

Magdalene Laundries, also known as Mary Magdalene's asylums, were institutions from the 18th to the late 20th centuries ostensibly to house "fallen women", a term used to imply female sexual promiscuity or work in prostitution. However, most women entering these such laundries were in fact unmarried mothers and in many cases these women were forced into such institutions by the powers of the Catholic Church and even family members who did not want to live with the "shame" of having a woman in their home with a baby born outside of wedlock.

Read More:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalene_asylum

[OnDoutside]

17. Yes, but that has nothing to do with the current health system. On that specific point though, my

mother in law grew up in a house that backed on to one of those Magdalene laundries, and used to regularly watch these young girls bringing out the washing to be dried outside, in complete silence, with nuns (wardens) watching over them. I had an aunt who, as an unmarried 18 year old, gave birth to a son. She was "lucky" that an older sister of hers was married and living 100 miles away, so she was sent off to her for 6 months or so, and then the child was given up for adoption. She passed away in March, but we have tried to find him, without success so far. We believe, if still alive, he may be living in London.

[dmosh42]

8. I agree, but remember Obama wanted the public option included with the...

ACA, but the party pros rejected it based on what the insurance companies wanted. The corporate gang still have power!

[Demsrule86]

43. The election of Scott Brown made it impossible and if you recall

Lieberman voted against it for 55 and above.

[SaschaHM]

9. I disagree. I see no reason to take the heat off of the Republicans when there is little...

that we can do at the moment. The more they crash and burn, the better single payer starts to look to the public.

Even Bernie is waiting until the current Republican self-immolation is over to introduce his Medicare-for-all bill.

Do we have a concrete plan for implementation w/ the inevitable budgetary and tax implications spelled out? Has it even been tested(single payer) successfully in any state?

"Well it works in Europe" is a terrible message when Republicans can just counter that "Dems won't even implement it in the states that they control because they can't pay for it".

Let someone in a purple or red state run on it in 2018. They may lose, but atleast we will see the type of opposition that we will face and we'll be able to counter it. Heck, Elizabeth Warren should run on it.

[OnDoutside]

12. Great comment. If it works anywhere in Europe, it's because it's properly funded. Most EU countries

that is not the case. In places where their health system is working, like Scandanavia, Germany, Holland they are not low tax countries.

[DFW]

31. I live in Germany. "Working" is relative, though you're better off in general

When my wife took early retirement 5 years ago due both to health reasons and being mobbed by her corrupt employer, she lost her health insurance, and I paid €400 a month to keep her insured. It was not automatic or free. When I asked what it would cost to insure me in Germany, I was quoted €2500 a month out of my own pocket, or over $34,000 a year, due to a pre-existing condition (really!)--a bit above my pay grade.

Germany has a many tiered health insurance system, but what it boils down to when it comes to treatment, you are either "privat," maybe 10% of the population, which means you get treated when you have a problem, pay up front and hope you get reimbursed--or you are a "Kassenpatient," which is the rest of the population.That means they get around to you when they damn well feel like it, but you are not out of pocket.

Spain and Italy are not "low tax" countries, either, but if you have a problem and can get to one of the Germanic countries (D, DK, NL, S, N), you have a better chance--though far from 100%--of getting good treatment.

The costs in the USA are one of the main problems. I had two operations with 3 day stays each in the hospital in 2011. One was in Germany, one was in Dallas. The bill for the one in the USA was $35,500, "reduced for the insurance company" to $26.600--something that is apparently S.O.P in the USA. No such reductions for individuals, only for insurance companies. The other operation was in Germany, where the bill came out to €11,000, which I had to pay for, and for which my insurance company in the USA refused to reimburse me (unauthorized physician and clinic, dontcha know).

When my wife was diagnosed last fall with a form of cancer that is almost always fatal, the €4800 I had been paying annually for health insurance suddenly seemed cheap, as she needed a complicated 5 hour operation by a specialist, and almost 4 weeks in the hospital. Without that, she would have been shunted to the end of the waiting line, and possibly been dead by now. The cancer she had is rare, and is called "Der Mörder (the murderer)" in the clinic she was treated at. It has two options: early detection and immediate treatment, or--death. She lucked out, not all do.

I used to see posts on here saying Germany had single payer--posts either deliberately lying or made out of total ignorance. It has a very distinctive first class and tourist class health care system, with a few hundred thousand who fall through the cracks and have no coverage at all.

[OnDoutside]

34. 100% agree with you, and it's why I asked the question what

People meant by "single payer". A friend of mine who lives in Frankfurt with his wife and 2 kids, worked as an IT contractor until his salary was over some cutoff for healthcare, meaning he would have to pay an extra 11,000 Euro a year as a self employed person. He was fortunate that he was able to get the same job from his then client, as a full time employee.

The point is that there is no perfect system, and anywhere there is then it costs.

Glad to hear your wife is on the mend.

[DFW]

36. If the Germans only wanted to charge him 11,000 euros a year for health insurance

Then he probably had no pre-existing condition. I did, so my quote was €30,000 a year. If the income taxes were low enough to compensate, that would be fine, but you hit the highest bracket at about €80,000 a year gross salary. They claim it's "only" 42%, but that is misleading because they tack on the "Solidarity Supplement" plus other charges, so your effective rate is 50%, in some cases higher. The threshold for the cutoff for mandatory "privat" health insurance is (I think) higher than that if your employer is in Germany, but my employer is still in the USA, so they want to hit me with the €30,000 for health insurance even if I were selling pencils on the street.

My wife was that one case in a thousand where her kind of cancer was caught early enough to not need (as far as we know, anyway) another round of chemo and radiation. She has definitely had enough of cancer battles for a good while now. As both of my parents and all of their siblings had cancer, and all but one died of it (my mom had a stroke during her cancer therapy, died of that instead), with me, it's not "if," but "when." Of course, a piano could fall on my head while walking down some city street, too, so worrying about it doesn't seem like a very practical obsession.

[OnDoutside]

60. That's unreal, and I'm glad you are passing on this to people here.

Yes, my friend had no preconditions. For a decent plan here in Ireland, we would be paying about 3000 euro for 2 adults and a child, for private insurance. If you had preconditions, you would have to serve a waiting time for each individual precondition, if signing up for the first time. Once in, you can switch to the best package for you, regardless of precondition, with another provider, at renewal time.

ER here is a particular problem, with people lying on trolleys for days, at critical times of the year, public or private. Also the waiting times for public patients are long for elective surgery.

[DFW]

63. It depends on who pays attention

Many people here realize there is no health coverage paradise anywhere. No country has physicians blanketing their country, available on every block to treat any malady and prescribe any medication at a moment's notice, or schedule complicated surgery at any time at every patient's convenience. A country would have to have an army of doctors in every field and, to compensate for the cost, no army of the kind that fights wars instead of ailments (nice concept, though, come to think of it).

There are the ones who know, just KNOW, that all Europe has nothing but identical systems of immediate free medication and health care on demand for all who show up on their doorstep, but those are usually the ones that also know that Hillary has horns and a tail, Sanders wears a halo, Obama is a "corporatist," and that the Democratic Party is run by nothing but useless, uncaring "oligarchs." Their knowledge stems from, to put it in polite terms, less than hands-on experience.

[davekriss]

16. Most countries?

Every developed nation has universal healthcare at a fraction of our cost and with mostly better outcomes. Except us. Sad.

[Demsrule86]

41. And they are willing to pay higher taxes but Americans not so much...also

in Europe they have pensions and a safety net that we don't have...it is a far more complicated issue than many realize...and the insurance companies and big pharm will fight to the bitter end. It won't happen, and if we lose the ACA, many will die. There will never be a successful single payer bill...little by little when we have the majority we lower the age for Medicare...which won't happen if we lose the ACA. Again, we are snatching defeat from the jaws of victory to advance single payer at this time.

[davekriss]

45. Don't misunderstand

I do not want to lose the ACA. "And pay higher taxes". Keep in mind that, in the civilized countries, better medical care cost far less per capita. So higher taxes would be less expensive than insurance premiums and the costs to society incurred by those that are forced to go without.

(Added on edit) which is why rational health care is so vehemently resisted: it would take a large stream of income out of the pockets of a privileged few.

[Demsrule86]

56. Taxes in other countries cover a safety net that includes health care coverage and there are

problems although my UK relatives don't want to see it end. I am not talking about what I want... I am a for single payer but now is not the time...and I don't know when it can pass. We were lucky to get the ACA and will be lucky to Keep it.

[mythology]

49. But being intellectually honest requires admitting that very few of them have single payer

The Netherlands, Germany and Switzerland all have systems that are not that dissimilar to the ACA for example where insurance coverage is provided through private insurance companies.

In Denmark, the system isn't national at all. It's funded and managed at local levels.

The preoccupation with with an almost fetishized national single payer health care to me distracts from making legitimate improvements in the system. Granted not as much as Republican obsession with doing away with health care, but I don't think either actually serves the interest of creating an objectively better system than what we have now.

People talk about single payer national health care as if it is a panacea that will instantly solve all problems. It doesn't avoid the fact that Republicans would fight tooth and nail to defund it. It doesn't deal with the existing shortage of general practitioners and medical student loan debt. It doesn't deal with the lack of rural health care options.

[davekriss]

51. You'll note I did not say "single payer"

I did not say single payer precisely because I am aware of the myriad of approaches in use in Europe. The end result, however, is citizens don't have to live in financial dread of getting sick, most have better outcomes, and they do it at a fraction of our per capita cost.

We here in the U.S. mostly rank somewhere in the middle in terms of macro measures of quality of healthcare. We have almost third world measures in things like maternal deaths during childbirth, etc. Yet the propaganda is thick here, with many believing we have the best healthcare in the world. The top 2% may have that, but not so much for the rest of us, and definitely not so for the 50+ million without insurance prior to the ACA.

[LanternWaste]

57. I think you're simply confusing an easily-remembered short hand for actual policy and data.

"The preoccupation with with an almost fetishized national single payer health care..."

I think you're simply confusing an easily-remembered short hand with actual policy and data.

[Wounded Bear]

18. Something along this line needs to be embedded in our party platform for 18 and 20...

I'm for three things, as a minimum.

1. Expand Medicare by lowering eligibility to at least age 55 and morph Medicaid into a public option of insurance for any citizen and their families.

2. Solidify VA medical care to where all vets with Gen or above discharge get healthcare for life for them and their families.

3. Start a Federal rural "medification" program in which the Fed, partnering with the states and locals, help finance "town doctors" responsible for primary medical care in a given town, village, or township.

[librechik]

19. of course it is the obvious solution--count on the Right to shit all over it

into the grave. literally. This fight will be worse than unionization. and ugly and probably not successful under the circumstances.

[CK_John]

21. Timing is everything, and IMO this is the time. The GOP had 7yrs, the

DNC had no ideas or clout to do anything but...even DT45 are now ready for a workable solution..

[Demsrule86]

40. No he is not...he will use it to bring down the ACA and then

you get the middle finger...

[canetoad]

20. It's exactly the right time

Compare and contrast the benefits of the GOP/Trump cruel, expensive insurance options with single payer. IMO, never been a better time to start the assault.

[CozyMystery]

22. I live in a bright red county in western PA and

no matter what the Democrats want, it is deemed to be communist. These folks think socialism is communism.

So the people need to be educated about this.

Funny they are so pro-Russia now due to Trump, but HATE communism and socialism in every form.

[leftstreet]

25. DURec

[WhiteTara]

26. I understand this is in the works

We'll see what happens.

[creeksneakers2]

27. I don't think its a good idea to push it now

The fight right now is trying to save Obamacare. The GOP has disadvantages. Those disadvantages would evaporate if they could frame it as a choice between Trumpcare and single payer. With millions of dollars for commercials, it wouldn't be hard to terrify the public about single payer.

[pablo_marmol]

29. Agreed.......

........though this is one of those areas where I'd love to be wrong.

[CK_John]

30. The GOP have a tax scam to be the greatest wealth transfer from the middle class to the 1%.

The 1% knows that the POTUS is not playing with a full deck, so they are grabbing as much as they can get hold of now.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

32. WAY overdue!! Bernie's been leading the way on this for YEARS...

More dem leaders need to get on board and push the agenda forward, with DNC support... and PRONTO!!

[Demsrule86]

39. Now is the time with the GOP in control of the entire government...this is competely

wrong. Save the ACA. We live in a 50-50 country. It may be our only chance at health care for years.

[Demsrule86]

44. We will in the end...lose ACA if we push single payer and get exactly nothing.

[Lunabell]

33. Absolutely!

Why are some Democrats resisting this? I know why, but you tell me!

[Demsrule86]

38. Because it weakens the only health care we have ...the ACA. We should pull out all stops to save the

ACA ...not give the GOP ammunition against it.

[Lunabell]

58. Corporation giveaway and I am sick of that.

We need real healthcare and Democrats should go for it if they cared about people.

[BainsBane]

35. Why the DNC?

Why not legislators? Laws are passed in congress. Let Bernie start to build a coalition around the issue.

[Demsrule86]

37. No it is not...it is time for the DNC to save the ACA and millions of lives...including

babies...there is no chance of single payer with the GOP in control...and we will never get it if the ACA goes down.

[CK_John]

46. The DNC has no play in keeping or fixing ACA. We need to put single payer in play.

We probably will need to merge it in with a UBI program in the near future(5-10yrs).

[Demsrule86]

55. If we can keep it alive.

[NCTraveler]

47. The DNC should be promoting the ideas in the party platform.

When platform is all in for single payer, that is what the DNC should promote.

It seems you are not familiar with the DNC.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/uploads.democrats.org/Downloads/2016_DNC_Platform.pdf

[CK_John]

48. I am very familiar with the DNC, and right now it is in a struggle.

[NCTraveler]

50. It is under new leadership and setting up strategy going forward.

You are also clearly not familiar with the DNC. Them going consistently for a single payer system would go against the party platform and alienate members. It would then be similar to the other failing BoBer groups out there who wish they has one one hundredth the clout of the DNC. Maybe that is your point.

[stevenleser]

52. Given the opposition is engaged in a circular firing squad, you want to give them another target?

Your strategy is a bit lacking here.

[CK_John]

53. Insurance companies want no part of healthcare, only the federal Treasury

can provide funding for healthcare. Just like SocSec. Single payer will be the only solution.

[GulfCoast66]

54. Except most EU countries

Including 2 of the best, Germany and France DO NOT have single payer and are almost as critical of the U.K. system and a lesser degree the Canadian system as they are ours.

This Social Democrat is vehemently opposed to single payer but would happily pay more taxes for the French system.

[kentuck]

62. I agree.

they should be pushing this argument right now, even as the Republicans debate what their next move might be?

[krispos42]

68. Phase in Medicare-for-all

Step one: Everybody born in 2017 and later has Medicare
Step two: Start moving the eligibility year 6 years forwards per year. This year: 1952, next year: 1958, year after, 1964, etc. In 11 years, the whole country is covered. I'd be in Medicare in 2021.

[workinclasszero]

71. We will either have single payer/Medicare for all in this country or

only the rich will ever have any health care at all.