‘We’re Figuring Out How We Can Mount A National Campaign’ For Single Payer

Print Friendly

Above Photo: From commondreams.org

I’m ‘absolutely’ introducing single-payer healthcare bill

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) told Jake Tapper on CNN’s State of the Union Sunday that he will “absolutely” introduce legislation on single-payer healthcare now that the Senate GOP’s bill to repeal ObamaCare has failed.

“If people don’t like the private insurance that they’re getting, they should have a Medicare-type public option available in every state in this country,” Sanders said

Asked if he would follow through on his pledge to submit single-payer legislation,  Sanders said, “Of course we are, we’re tweaking the final points of the bill and we’re figuring out how we can mount a national campaign to bring people together”

“We are the only major country on Earth not to guarantee health care to all people,” Sanders said, “We should … move in the direction of every other major country.”

“I believe at the end of the day, the American people will conclude that Medicare for all — Medicare is working now for people 65 or older — let’s expand it to everyone.”

  • mmckinley

    Good news and bad news. The good: Is Bernie finally going to introduce the legislation he’s been promising for four months, now, always saying “soon”? That is, the Senate version of HR 676 that will end the blood-sucking private health insurance industry that is draining the people of America dry? An industry that is committed not to providing any kind of service, and certainly not to providing health care, but to making money by denying people health care, by bankrupting and killing us? The bad: Or is this bill going to be for a “public option,” allowing people to buy into Medicare or Medicaid, which will perpetuate the for-profit private health insurance industry and this deadly system that is killing and bankrupting us? Bernie, please don’t betray us, your base. We are counting on you. The time for Medicare for All is NOW.

  • kevinzeese

    It will be very important to see what Sanders is proposing. It will not be a senate version of HR 676 but his office claims it will be based on the House bill co-sponsored by 115 members. Some key things that Sanders must include: the end of for profit investor owned health providers. These were not allowed until the Nixon era and that experiment has been a failure leading to higher health costs and poorer healthcare. Second, he cannot allow the wealthy to buy the way around the public system. The way this works is everybody is in the same system and no one is out. A universal system means we all have a stake in making sure the system is excellent. If the wealthy can buy their way out, it undermines that necessary solidarity.

    We will see what Sanders introduces and let people know if it is the kind of proposal the country needs.

  • Aquifer

    Sounds like another typical Dem bait and switch to me …

    Sanders – “…they should have a Medicare-type public option available in every state in this country,”

    Whoah! Public option? Sorry, folks, “public option” is not the same as Medicare for All – BIG difference – if what he is proposing is a “public option” he is NOT proposing Medicare for All as outlined in HR676 – the “gold standard” for the concept ….

    O did the same thing – touting “universal health care” then came up with the ACA which was anything but …

    It is no secret that Sanders and the other Ds main focus is to “fix” the ACA – he has said that over and over – but the ACA and Medicare for All are fundamentally opposed – the former relies on a backbone of private for profit insurers – the latter eliminates them …

    So yeah – he is for “Medicare for All” – bit by bit, step by step – hey, we gotta ease into it, eh? Incrementally – we’ll get there, – sometime, maybe, in this century, but lets not “rush” it – HR676 has been in the House for 14 years, but let’s not “rush” …

    The devil is in the details – don’t confuse Sanders plan with HR676 – unless of course, he just puts a Sen # on the latter and introduces it – real simple, ‘twould be, if that is what he intends, so why would it take all this time to do it ..

    No, he is “tweaking it” – indeed – so what goes in his sausage maker is HR676, what comes out – well, it ain’t gonna be that … I suspect there will be more than a few “preservatives” … :)

  • Aquifer

    He did NOT say he was going to Introduce HR676 as a Sen bill – he is playing with words, just as O did with “universal healthcare” which turned into – the ACA …just the other day he had a chance to vote for the HR676 Senate equivalent in the Blaine Amendment to the R bill – and he voted – “Present”

    https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/06/09/single-payer-is-not-a-priority-even-for-democrats-who-say-they-support-single-payer/

    http://healthoverprofit.org/2017/07/29/democratic-senators-chose-party-over-people/

    Sanders betrayed his base when he supported Clinton instead of Stein – for that he was made “Head of Outreach” for the DP – and he is fulfilling his role …

  • DHFabian

    What has been so disingenuous about “Medicare for All” is that it is actually about some health care coverage for some. It is not universal health care. Medicare and Medicaid were enacted together. The elderly poor and the disabled rely on dual benefits, Medicare/Medicaid. Medicaid covers the Medicare premiums, provides prescription/treatment coverage, and some goes toward rent subsidies for assisted living apartments for this group (far preferable to, and far more cost-effective, than nursing homes).

  • DHFabian

    What good would a Medicare card do for the retired poor and the disabled, without Medicaid? They could get an operation, but couldn’t afford the medications necessary to survive it and recover.

  • DHFabian

    But on universal health care: Congress knows it wouldn’t make sense in today’s US. You would have to explain the logic of allowing anything more than emergency room services to the poor, 20-some years into our war on the poor. Deprivation of adequate food and shelter take a very heavy toll on health. In fact, the overall life expectancy of the US poor already fell below that of every developed nation. We can continue to ignore this, but Congress can’t.

  • Aquifer

    You are deliberately being dense, aren’t you? Read HR 676 and get back to me ….

    New Improved Medicare for All eliminates the need for Medicaid – what is so difficult about understanding “All” as it is outlined in the bill …

    HR 676 IH
    TITLE I—ELIGIBILITY AND BENEFITS

    SEC. 101. ELIGIBILITY AND REGISTRATION.

    (a) IN GENERAL
    .—All individuals residing in the United States (including any territory of the United States) are covered under the Medicare For All Program entitling them to a universal, best quality standard of care.

    Lotsa luck twisting that around ….

  • Aquifer

    Oh hell, Congress can ignore anything it likes and has been doing so for quite some time now ..

    But as for the “logic” of supplying health care to poor people – hmm, i don’t recall anything in my Hippocratic Oath that excluded folks from care because they were poor ….

    Of course we need to deal with providing adequate food and shelter, but the idea that we should hold off on providing health care until we we do – is just dumb …

  • Aquifer

    I have a question that hopefully Dr. Flowers can help me out with – i have been discussing (promoting) HR 676 on another site – and a question came up about finding – the bill refers to an “excise tax on payroll and self-employment income” – normally an excise tax is a “sales tax” – but now Medicare is funded explicitly through a “payroll tax” – so why doesn’t the bill use that wording instead of “excise tax”, or is this a different tax from the payroll tax – i am a bit of a stickler for words – especially in legislation, they make all the difference …. :)