Single Payer, Progressive Caucus And Cuban Revolution

| Create!

Above Photo: Single payer protest in NYC by Occupy

Democrats have 201 members in the House of Representatives.

Of those, 71 are members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

The Congressional Progressive Caucus has endorsed HR 676, the single payer bill in the House.

As of this writing, HR 676 has 70 sponsors and co-sponsors.

But fully 25 House members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus are not signed onto the bill.

(They are — Ruben Gallego (Arizona), Maxine Waters (California), Nanette Barragan (California), Jared Polis (Colorado), Rosa DeLauro (Connecticut), Lisa Blunt Rochester (Delaware), Val Demings (Florida), Lois Frankel (Florida), Frederica Wilson (Florida), Andre Carson (Indiana), Dave Loebsack (Iowa), Anthony Brown (Maryland), Joseph Kennedy (Massachusetts), Debbie Dingell (Michigan), Ruben Kihuen (Nevada), Carol Shea Porter (New Hampshire), Frank Pallone (New Jersey), Nydia Velazquez (New York), Carolyn Maloney (New York), Adriana Espaillat (New York), Peter DeFazio (Oregon), David Cicilline (Rhode Island), Eddie Bernice Johnson (Texas), Lloyd Doggett (Texas) and Don Beyer (Virginia).)

And the only Senate member of the Progressive Caucus — Bernie Sanders — is dragging his feet on introducing a companion single payer bill in the Senate.

Recalcitrant Democrats say they are too busy defending Obamneycare to get behind single payer.

Typical is Progressive Caucus member Don Beyer who said that while he has voiced support for single payer in the past, his immediate priority is “protecting the health care achievements of President Obama.”

There is a history here, of course.

Back in 2009, a young single payer activist, Nick Skala, ran into the same kind of stonewall from the Progressive Caucus, when he presented the case for single payer.

He was told that his presentation in favor of single payer and against the public option was seen as an attack on the Progressive Caucus.

Democrats are in danger of being sucked into the Obamneycare death spiral.

What could emerge is a new political movement that will sweep away the Democratic Party and sweep single payer into law.

Some Bernie Sanders supporters, like Nick Brana ( see this coming and are urging Sanders to bolt the Democratic Party and start a new people’s party.

But Sanders has endorsed Hillary Clinton for President and is now beholden to Chuck Schumer and the Senate Democratic leadership.

Texas billionaire and Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban has been signaling recently that if he runs for President in 2020, it might be outside the Democratic Party and single payer might be his issue.

Cuban told reporters recently that the U.S. Constitution should be amended to make healthcare a right.

A reporter from PJ Media asked Cuban last week why he supports single payer.

“Everybody who has that uncertainty of not knowing if something goes really wrong in their family – what they are going to do – that goes away so, I think that makes people a lot more productive and a lot more self-sufficient,” Cuban said.

Some in the press are calling it “The Cuban Revolution.”

Tim Miller, Jeb Bush’s former spokesman, who is now a partner at a Washington, D.C., public affairs firm, told the Texas Monthly recently that if Trump does not crash and burn over the next four years, there is little chance that a traditional status-quo Democrat, such as a senator or governor, will be able to beat him in 2020.

“The only people who I think could go toe-to-toe with Trump are Michelle Obama or Mark Cuban,” Miller said.

And Mark McKinnon, the former political adviser who co-created and co-hosts Showtime’s The Circus, told the Texas Monthly that if the Democrats don’t want Cuban because of his more-conservative positions on economic policy, he would have a shot at winning as a third-party candidate.

“You need thirty million dollars to get on the ballot in every state, which wouldn’t be a problem for him,” McKinnon said. “And then he would be wide open to go mano a mano against Trump, making the case that he’s essentially a far better version of Trump, someone who’s a better businessman and who’s also got a much better, more thoughtful grasp on the issues. If the question for 2020 becomes who can out-Trump Trump, the clear and perhaps only answer is Cuban.”

  • bobthecat

    The Democrats were never in support of ‘Medicare for All’. It was just a talking point to get elected. The Democrats, just like the Republican, are shills for the insurance companies and big Pharma.

    Progressives (if there are any) should have gone and talked to Trump with a plan for Medicare for All, but they refused. The one chance for the decent health care and they did not even try. All he could have said was no, so why did the groups pushing refuse. I used to work to get Single-Payer, but no more. Either you want proper health care or you want to play politics. You can’t have both.

  • DHFabian

    I think Democrats are over for the foreseeable future. Quick history: The Reagan Dems of the 1980s moved further to the right to merge with the Clinton wing in the 1990s. They now own and control the party. The Clinton wing split the Dem voting base wide apart, and the past eight years confirmed that this split is permanent.

    Assuming “Medicare for All” refers to universal health care, no, it’s not going to happen. Such a thing wouldn’t make sense today. We’re twenty years into our war on the poor, brought to fruition by the Clinton Democrats. What would be the logic of providing more than emergency room services to our poor just to dump them back on the streets? Deprivation of adequate food and shelter take a heavy toll on human health.

  • DHFabian

    There is no way that Trump/the right wing would have been open to the idea. Trumps is what he appears to be, and his agenda is to protect the US aristocracy while establishing his name in history.

    There are some progressives (by definition) out here, but their voices have been drown out by the liberal bourgeoisie/media for years. The word itself was hijacked and exploited. By the time certain liberal media began promoting H. Clinton as a “bold progressive,” we knew the term had been reduced to a meaningless marketing word.

  • chetdude

    Not true.

    I think that many “republican deficit hawks” could be persuaded that a plan to cut health care costs by at least 30% (That’s about $1.1 Trillion per year) while covering everyone with no co-pays, no deductibles is a good idea…

    HR676 – Expanded and Improved Medicare for All…

  • bobthecat

    It does not make sense for the politicians, but it makes sense for our common souls. And the same is true of the natural world. We need a health environment for ourselves and all things on this planet.

    Most importantly we need to start talking about over population; that conversation somehow stopped in the1970’s. We must do this by limiting the number of births, not by wars and letting people die in the street from poverty. Think about it more people, less jobs – what do you have? Slave labor and fighting for resources – not a pretty picture.

  • bobthecat

    Your first sentence proved my point. You think you have the answer, so why try? Maybe your wrong.

    This morning I saw a post on CNN (for some reason it won’t play on my computer), but it is about Trump pushing Single-Payer in his 2000 book. The link below is the video, but as I said, I have not been able to listen to it.

  • Aquifer

    Good grief! The only thing that DOES make sense today re healthcare is Medicare for All ,,,
    So not only would the poor you claim to be such a champion for be dumped on the street but they couldn’t get care for the conditions that living on the street induces – how bizarre …

  • Aquifer

    No, you don’t need $30 million to get on the ballot in every state – the GP got on over 45 with CONSIDERABLY less – we don’t need Cuban to get SP – all we need are a bunch of Greens ..

  • Aquifer